🚀 go-pugleaf

>For quite a while, I have heard superscalar used, and I think the term was
>defined in a paper in IEEE Computer a while back, but I am still a little
>fuzzy on it.  Is "superscalar" an exact concept, or is it a buzzword like 
>"RISC"?  Is a Multiflw machine a superscalar machine, or the i860, or
>the Weitek XL-8064?

Well, this is a good question.  Since I have been using the "buzz word"
superscalar, maybe I should give the definition I use.  To me, superscalar
is simply an implementation that executes multiple instructions per
cycle (at least for a RISC architecture) when dependencies permit.  It
accomplishes this multiple-instruction-per-cycle rate *without any help
from the instruction stream itself.*  That is, take an instruction stream
that executes just fine on the 29000; if the same instruction stream were
presented to the S-29000, the superscalar 29000, more than one instruction
would be executed per cycle when dependencies permit.  To accomplish this
to any reasonable degree, two or more (nearly?) identical pipelines must
be present (I think).

Note that this is significantly different from VLIW or the i860.  For
these implementations, multiple operations can execute in one cycle, but
that is because the instruction says, in an explicit way, to do so.  Said
another way, these machines will not execute multiple operations per cycle
*unless* the instruction stream says to do so.  A superscalar machine needs
no such help.  *However*, to squeeze the most from a superscalar design,
one would like to have the compiler arrange things so that dependencies are
minimized.  *But note*, even the compiler-arranged instruction stream will
still execute just fine on a non-superscalar implementation of the
archticture.