Messages in this thread | | | Subject | TM3120 and udelay. | Date | Thu, 20 Jan 2000 12:44:46 +0100 (MET) | From | (Rogier Wolff) |
| |
Hi Linus,
Do you mind me asking a few TransMeta questions? (Do you mind answering them ;-)
How does Linux on the TM3120 (and TM5400) cope with the variable speed in which the udelay loop is executed?
You are sometimes listed as the "mobile-linux" author and sometimes as someone who has worked on the code-morpher. My guess is that you spent the last few weeks on mobile-linux, but you actually worked on the code-morpher most of the time. Right?
As minitiarization is all about reducing component count, would it be possible for an OEM to fit a 2M flashchip, and have you move the contents of the flash into write-protected RAM before starting the x86 boot?
You guys managed to fit a complete x86 interpreter/compiler/optimizer in 64k instructions (1mbyte / 128bit/instruction)? Aaargh! that's lean! How much of that 64k instruction space is actually used? Does the TM3120 have a 16bit PC, or is it 32 bits wide? (Or something else?)
Registers are 32 bits wide right? That means that emulating Merced (or whatever Intel came up with for a name this time) is left to a future Transmeta CPU, which internally has the 64-bit support.
Intel CPUs allow me to upload new microcode (signed by Intel) using a special instruction. Can I upgrade the Code-morpher on a transeta CPU in a similar way? (Expected answer: Yes, but you're not allowed to tell me).
As the TM3120 and TM5400 have serious hardware support for certain x86 features (e.g. the flags register and the MMU), it won't be easy to, say, write a good & fast 68000 code morpher. Right?
But if say Motorola would show up wanting around 100M of your processors a year, Transmeta would simply add the neccesary constructs to the hardware (at say 2-4% silicon overhead) and run 68k code pretty efficiently before the year is over... Right?
What is the voltage range for the CPU? The examples state that you get cubic power-reduction. The examples name "clock at 90%", voltage at 90% -> .9^3 power consumption. However this becomes more impressive at 50% -> .5^3 power consumption: only about 10% of full-power. However, the voltage range isn't that large, so my guess is that the CPU will run at 90% core voltage at 90% of its rated frequency, and below that you are only reducing the clock and get a linear power-advantage just like everybody else. Right?
Roger.
-- ** R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2137555 ** *-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --* "I didn't say it was your fault. I said I was going to blame it on you."
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |