From: Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>
To: "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>
Cc: richard.brunner@amd.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Intel vs AMD64
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 05:39:59 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040226133959.GA19254@dingdong.cryptoapps.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7F740D512C7C1046AB53446D37200173EA28A5@scsmsx402.sc.intel.com>
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 09:32:08PM -0800, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> Yes, "implementation specific" is one of the differences between
> IA-32e and AMD64, i.e. that behavior is architecturally defined on
> AMD64, but on IA-32e (as I posted):
> Near branch with 66H prefix:
> As documented in PRM the behavior is implementation specific and
> should avoid using 66H prefix on near branches.
Not that it really matters that much --- but I'm curious to know why
Intel made this decision?
It seems really dumb to make such differences when Intel is already
sorely lagging behind their competitor here, I would think given the
circumstances Intel would try to be as compatible as possible on all
fronts.
I'd almost be nervous about getting an IA-32e CPU right now given that
the AMD64 chips work just fine, have had lots of testing and there is
plenty of code out there which is *known* to work reliably.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-02-26 13:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-02-26 5:32 Intel vs AMD64 Nakajima, Jun
2004-02-26 13:39 ` Chris Wedgwood [this message]
2004-02-26 14:35 ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-02-26 19:25 ` Timothy Miller
2004-02-26 19:46 ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-02-27 18:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-02-26 19:18 ` Timothy Miller
2004-02-26 19:45 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-02-27 14:43 ` Timothy Miller
2004-03-03 17:34 ` Pavel Machek
[not found] <7F740D512C7C1046AB53446D37200173EA28A5@scsmsx402.sc.intel.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
[not found] ` <403E4681.20603@techsource.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2004-02-26 20:17 ` Andi Kleen
2004-02-27 14:50 ` Timothy Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-02-26 4:28 richard.brunner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040226133959.GA19254@dingdong.cryptoapps.com \
--to=cw@f00f.org \
--cc=jun.nakajima@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richard.brunner@amd.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.