Re: Superscalar vs. multiple CPUs ?

Article View: comp.sys.intel

Article #1178

#1178

From: Norman Hardy
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 20:36

17 lines
1362 bytes

In article <PRENER.92Dec13030928@prener.watson.ibm.com> prener@watson.ibm.com (Dan Prener) writes:
>In article <1992Dec13.063930.8687@netcom.com> norm@netcom.com (Norman Hardy) writes:
>
>> In article <PRENER.92Dec12010123@prener.watson.ibm.com> prener@watson.ibm.com (Dan Prener) writes:
>
>I was thinking of situations such as a floating-point functional unit
>having state that includes the current rounding mode.
>--
>                                   Dan Prener (prener@watson.ibm.com)

Good point. Thank you. The 88K's systolic array carries 
such state independently for each stage of the array. This 
avoids draining the array upon changing the state. The same 
works for a shared functional unit. 

By the way this was either John Cocke's idea or he would 
know whose idea it was.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1992Dec13.203624.12416@netcom.com>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!norm

References:

<PRENER.92Dec12010123@prener.watson.ibm.com> <1992Dec13.063930.8687@netcom.com> <PRENER.92Dec13030928@prener.watson.ibm.com>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,comp.arch
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!norm
From: norm@netcom.com (Norman Hardy)
Subject: Re: Superscalar vs. multiple CPUs ?
Message-ID: <1992Dec13.203624.12416@netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
References: <PRENER.92Dec12010123@prener.watson.ibm.com> <1992Dec13.063930.8687@netcom.com> <PRENER.92Dec13030928@prener.watson.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 20:36:24 GMT
Lines: 17

Reply to Parent Message