Re: ICM vs. L and LTR

Article View: comp.lang.asm370

Article #322

#322

From: Kevin Hardman -- Personal Accoun...
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 04:28

22 lines
1391 bytes

>>    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

Sorry, I can't supply references, but I read an article recently that
discussed the very issue and several related myths.  According to the
article the L, LTR was actually faster in older (much older) machines,
but in since like the 370/168 the ICM is actually faster.  If it's really
important I could see if I could dig up the article.


--Kevin

+=====================================+=====================================+
| B. Kevin Hardman                    | Internet: hard@rock.concert.net     |
+-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
| No Affiliations, No Disclaimers, No Apologies                             |

Technical Details

Message-ID: <9208132303.AA16112@nettlerash.berkeley.edu>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!rock.UUCP!hard

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!rock.UUCP!hard
From: hard@rock.UUCP (Kevin Hardman -- Personal Account)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.asm370
Subject: Re: ICM vs. L and LTR
Message-ID: <9208132303.AA16112@nettlerash.berkeley.edu>
Date: 13 Aug 92 04:28:52 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: IBM 370 Assembly Programming Discussion List <ASM370%UGA.BITNET@cmsa.Berkeley.EDU>
Distribution: inet
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 22