lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateFri, 21 Nov 2003 08:48:57 +0000
FromJamie Lokier <>
SubjectRe: transmeta cpu code question
John Bradford wrote:
> > > It's also not faster in any meaningful way, since the dynamic
> > > translator does optimistic optimization.
> > 
> > Statically compiled code for the Crusoe chips may not be faster.
> > (Arguably statically compiled code for _any_ CPU is not the best
> > strategy for fast code).
> > 
> > But if someone is able to write better code morphing software than
> > Transmeta, that would be faster :)
> 
> The idea of a CMS which only implemented the subset of X86
> instructions that gcc actually uses was discussed on the list a few
> months ago, but unsuprisingly it never progressed beyond the thought
> experiment stage.

What would be the point in that?  Surely the CMS overhead for decoding
the rarely used x86 instructions is negligable, precisely because of
their rarity?

-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [from the cache]
©2003-2008