Re: Instruction Parcel Size

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c arch 
Sujet : Re: Instruction Parcel Size
De : mitchalsup (at) *nospam* aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Groupes : comp.arch
Date : 09. Mar 2025, 02:43:07
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Rocksolid Light
Message-ID : <895b2a1ff3894c671bdf9343ca98eaf8@www.novabbs.org>
References : 1 2
User-Agent : Rocksolid Light
On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 1:15:14 +0000, Robert Finch wrote:

Recently started Q+2 development.
>
Trying to get code density closer to something like the 68k or VAX.
Sounds like My66000 also has good code density using 32-bit parcels. If
32-bit parcels work well, I have thought to try 24-bit parcels.
Ok, go all Quadriblock on me .... see if I care !

Decided to stay away from other odd sized parcels which create
addressing issues. Currently 3 sizes of instructions: 24 / 48 and
96-bit. The 96-bit instructions are usually for encoding a 64-bit
immediate. The first two opcode bits determine the size. 00=24 bit,
01=48 bit, 10=96 bit, 11 (reserved)
You might find 72-bit instructions useful in carrying a 32-bit
immediate.

ADD, AND, OR, EOR, CMP have 24-bit instruction forms:
iiiii-aaaaa-ttttt-ooooooo-00 <- immediate
bbbbb-aaaaa-ttttt-ooooooo-00 <- register
24-bit instruction forms allow using only the first 32 registers.
A 6-bit OpCode might let 1 more bit into immediate, or similar
sign control over register operand. Remember, this is the highly
used OpCode category. So, we have 32 Imm5(6) OpCodes.

ADD, AND, OR, EOR, CMP 48-bit instruction forms:
fffffff-oooo-ccccccc-bbbbbbb-aaaaaaa-ttttttt-ooooooo-01
48-bit instruction forms support a sign control bit on the register
spec, along with 64 registers.
It really looks like you are forming 2×24-bit instructions into
(wait for it) 2×24-bit containers. Sign control on operands is
useful 5-register operands may not be so. I am not against this
format, but I think you are wasting a lot of entropy here.

LOAD / STORE word size have 24-bit forms
ddddd-aaaaa-ttttt-ooooooo-00
Where do you get stack and structure displacements ?? This is one
place My 66000 ISA is significantly better than RISC-V.

Conditional Branches (compare and branch) are 48-bit
pp-R-TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT-aaaaaa-bbbbbb-A-ffff-ooooooo-01
Careful choice of oooooo may allow it to contain the condition
in the ffff field expanding the displacement to 25-effective
bits.

With load / store / basic arithmetic as 24-bit and 48-bit
compare-and-branch a good portion of instructions should occupy the same
or less storage space than a 32-bit ISA.
Questions remain wrt floating point constants and large integer
constants.

I have not written the assembler yet, so nothing to measure.
The data will be interesting.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
30 Jan 25 * Misc: Ongoing status...25BGB
31 Jan 25 +* Re: Misc: Ongoing status...19MitchAlsup1
31 Jan 25 i`* Re: Misc: Ongoing status...18BGB
31 Jan 25 i `* Re: Misc: Ongoing status...17MitchAlsup1
1 Feb 25 i  `* Re: Misc: Ongoing status...16BGB
1 Feb 25 i   `* Re: Misc: Ongoing status...15MitchAlsup1
1 Feb 25 i    `* Re: Misc: Ongoing status...14BGB
2 Feb 25 i     `* Re: Misc: Ongoing status...13MitchAlsup1
2 Feb 25 i      +- Re: Misc: Ongoing status...1BGB
2 Feb 25 i      `* Caller-saved vs. callee-saved registers (was: Misc: Ongoing status...)11Anton Ertl
2 Feb 25 i       `* Re: Caller-saved vs. callee-saved registers10BGB
2 Feb 25 i        `* Re: Caller-saved vs. callee-saved registers9BGB
3 Feb 25 i         `* Re: Caller-saved vs. callee-saved registers8MitchAlsup1
3 Feb 25 i          `* Re: Caller-saved vs. callee-saved registers7BGB
3 Feb 25 i           `* Re: Caller-saved vs. callee-saved registers6MitchAlsup1
3 Feb 25 i            `* Re: Caller-saved vs. callee-saved registers5BGB
4 Feb 25 i             `* Re: Caller-saved vs. callee-saved registers4MitchAlsup1
4 Feb 25 i              `* Re: Caller-saved vs. callee-saved registers3BGB
4 Feb 25 i               `* Re: Caller-saved vs. callee-saved registers2MitchAlsup1
5 Feb 25 i                `- Re: Caller-saved vs. callee-saved registers1BGB
9 Mar 25 `* Instruction Parcel Size5Robert Finch
9 Mar 25  `* Re: Instruction Parcel Size4MitchAlsup1
9 Mar 25   +- Re: Instruction Parcel Size1Robert Finch
9 Mar 25   `* Re: Instruction Parcel Size2Robert Finch
9 Mar 25    `- Re: Instruction Parcel Size1MitchAlsup1

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal