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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox