ICM vs. L and LTR

Article View: comp.lang.asm370

Article #315

#315

From: Dwayne A. Blumenberg
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 16:37

28 lines
1288 bytes

I've noticed lately that some recent IBM code uses
the sequence:

    L     Rx,AREA
    LTR   Rx,Rx
    BNZ   SOMEWHERE

and I was wondering if

    ICM   Rx,15,AREA
    BNZ   SOMEWHERE

would be faster?  It looks to me like the two code segments
would produce identical results (ignoring for the moment that
the LOAD instruction could take an index register, and that
ICM wasn't available on the 360, and that LOAD on a 360 could
cause a specification exception).

I'm sure that LTR is very fast, but is L + LTR faster than
ICM?  What, if any, advantages does the L + LTR sequence offer
above ICM?

Thanks.
-- 
Dwayne A. Blumenberg            | Internet:  dwayne@dwayneb.b30.ingr.com
IBM Systems Programmer          | UUCP:      ...uunet!ingr!b30!dwayneb!dwayne
Intergraph Corp., M.S. GD3002   | Voice:     (205) 730-3795
Huntsville, AL  35894-0001      | FAX:       (205) 730-3300

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1992Aug12.163757.759@infonode.ingr.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!infonode!dwayneb!dwayne

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Newsgroups: comp.lang.asm370
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!infonode!dwayneb!dwayne
From: dwayne@dwayneb.b17d.ingr.com (Dwayne A. Blumenberg)
Subject: ICM vs. L and LTR
Message-ID: <1992Aug12.163757.759@infonode.ingr.com>
Sender: usenet@infonode.ingr.com (Usenet Administrator)
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 16:37:57 GMT
Lines: 28