Linux MIPS Architecture development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: "Dominic Sweetman" <dom@algor.co.uk>,
	"Matthew Dharm" <mdharm@momenco.com>
Cc: <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: MIPS64 status?
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 13:54:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <00ee01c19cfa$ab8d3640$0deca8c0@Ulysses> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 15426.48692.795968.819750@gladsmuir.algor.co.uk

> > As I understand it, 64-bit support is really two different things:
> > 64-bit data path (i.e. unsigned long long) and 64-bit addressing
> > (for more than 4G of RAM).
> 
> Yes: the MIPS architecture is designed so there are lots of different
> things which can be "64-bit", and you don't have to go for them all at
> once.  This kind of choice can be as much curse as blessing, of course.

Careful, Dom.  As far as user-mode programs are concerned,
older 64-bit MIPS designs (R4xxxx/R5xxxx/R7xxxx), one cannot
enable 64-bit arithmetic without enabling 64-bit addressing,
both of these functions being enabled by the Status.UX bit.
SGI's IRIX OS allowed an execution model that provided
64-bit registers and math, while *simulating* a 32-bit address
space, based on sign-extending 32-bit addresses to 64-bits.
The user was spared doubling the footprint of all his pointers,
but the OS still had to manage the larger page tables.

The official MIPS64[tm] architecture spec from MIPS 
Technologies also provides a bit (Status.PX) which enables
the 64-bit data path without affecting address generation
and translation, which removes this quirk.  Only the very
most recent 64-bit cores and CPUs implement it, however.


            Regards,

            Kevin K.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: Dominic Sweetman <dom@algor.co.uk>, Matthew Dharm <mdharm@momenco.com>
Cc: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: MIPS64 status?
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 13:54:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <00ee01c19cfa$ab8d3640$0deca8c0@Ulysses> (raw)
Message-ID: <20020114125442.rNFTwrvI4l6cXeKhJkn_QYaWyYgkkmAFV3pA7937pBc@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 15426.48692.795968.819750@gladsmuir.algor.co.uk

> > As I understand it, 64-bit support is really two different things:
> > 64-bit data path (i.e. unsigned long long) and 64-bit addressing
> > (for more than 4G of RAM).
> 
> Yes: the MIPS architecture is designed so there are lots of different
> things which can be "64-bit", and you don't have to go for them all at
> once.  This kind of choice can be as much curse as blessing, of course.

Careful, Dom.  As far as user-mode programs are concerned,
older 64-bit MIPS designs (R4xxxx/R5xxxx/R7xxxx), one cannot
enable 64-bit arithmetic without enabling 64-bit addressing,
both of these functions being enabled by the Status.UX bit.
SGI's IRIX OS allowed an execution model that provided
64-bit registers and math, while *simulating* a 32-bit address
space, based on sign-extending 32-bit addresses to 64-bits.
The user was spared doubling the footprint of all his pointers,
but the OS still had to manage the larger page tables.

The official MIPS64[tm] architecture spec from MIPS 
Technologies also provides a bit (Status.PX) which enables
the 64-bit data path without affecting address generation
and translation, which removes this quirk.  Only the very
most recent 64-bit cores and CPUs implement it, however.


            Regards,

            Kevin K.

  reply	other threads:[~2002-01-14 13:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-01-14  5:13 MIPS64 status? Matthew Dharm
2002-01-14  8:13 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2002-01-14 20:00   ` Matthew Dharm
2002-01-14 20:00     ` Matthew Dharm
2002-01-14 20:42     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2002-01-14 23:07       ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-15  0:08         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2002-01-15 20:59           ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-15 20:00         ` John Heil
2002-01-15 20:55           ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-16 18:55           ` Dominic Sweetman
2002-01-14 21:17     ` Dominic Sweetman
2002-01-14 21:17       ` Dominic Sweetman
2002-01-14 23:09       ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-14 11:17 ` Dominic Sweetman
2002-01-14 12:54   ` Kevin D. Kissell [this message]
2002-01-14 12:54     ` Kevin D. Kissell
2002-01-14 13:37     ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2002-01-14 23:23     ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-15 13:07       ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2002-01-14 23:22   ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-15 19:11   ` Thiemo Seufer
2002-01-14 23:05 ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-14 23:25   ` Matthew Dharm
2002-01-14 23:25     ` Matthew Dharm
2002-01-14 23:45     ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-14 23:59     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2002-01-15  0:27       ` Matthew Dharm
2002-01-15  0:27         ` Matthew Dharm

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='00ee01c19cfa$ab8d3640$0deca8c0@Ulysses' \
    --to=kevink@mips.com \
    --cc=dom@algor.co.uk \
    --cc=linux-mips@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=mdharm@momenco.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox