From: Timothy Miller <miller@techsource.com>
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 14:18:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <403E4681.20603@techsource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7F740D512C7C1046AB53446D37200173EA28A5@scsmsx402.sc.intel.com>
Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
> 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.
In other words, Intel's implementation deviates from the architecture as
defined by AMD. So it's not 100% compatible. I just want this point to
be clear.
If these sorts of branches are common enough (and I suspect they are),
then this sort of deviation could have a notable code-size (and L1)
impact on code which is compiled to be compatible with both implementations.
Why did Intel decide to do that?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-02-26 19:08 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
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 [this message]
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=403E4681.20603@techsource.com \
--to=miller@techsource.com \
--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.