Sujet : Re: Efficiency of in-order vs. OoO
De : terje.mathisen (at) *nospam* tmsw.no (Terje Mathisen)
Groupes : comp.archDate : 26. Mar 2024, 11:47:07
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <utu5ir$1nvgh$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/91.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.18.1
Scott Lurndal wrote:
Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> writes:
Having reverse engineered the original Pentium EMON counters I got a
meeting with Intel about their next cpu (the PentiumPro), what I was
told about the Pentium was that this chip was the first one which was
too complicated to create/sell an In-Circuit Emulator (ICE) version, so
instead they added a bunch of counters for near-zero overhead monitoring
and depended on a bit-serial read-out when they needed to dump all state
for debugging. (I have forgotten the proper term for that interface! :-( )
Scan chains. The modern interface to scan chains (which we used on the
mainframes in the late 70's/early 80') is JTAG.
Thanks!
JTAG was indeed the term as was looking for (and not remembering). Maybe I'm getting old?
Terje
-- - <Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no>"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"