RE: Inquiry about brl statement

> As I remember it, a taken branch acts as a stop whereas
a non-taken
> branch doesn't (so if no explicit stop bit is following
a branch, then
> it must be OK for the entire group to be executed in
parallel).  I
> suppose it's possible the definition changed or that my
(admittedly
> bad) memory is playing tricks on me. 

The SDM page for "brl" doesn't look to have any
get-out-of stop-bits-free
option.  It says:

 "This instruction must be immediately followed by a
stop; otherwise
  its behaviour is undefined."

-Tony
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
"unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomovger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vge
r.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Tony,

I'm sure I missed that point about brl.  I probably just
assumed it
would have the same behavior as regular branches.  Thanks
for catching
that.

  --david

On 4/27/07, Luck, Tony <tony.luckintel.com> wrote:
> > As I remember it, a taken branch acts as a stop
whereas a non-taken
> > branch doesn't (so if no explicit stop bit is
following a branch, then
> > it must be OK for the entire group to be executed
in parallel).  I
> > suppose it's possible the definition changed or
that my (admittedly
> > bad) memory is playing tricks on me. 
>
> The SDM page for "brl" doesn't look to have
any get-out-of stop-bits-free
> option.  It says:
>
>  "This instruction must be immediately followed by
a stop; otherwise
>   its behaviour is undefined."
>
> -Tony
>


-- 
Mosberger Consulting LLC, http://www.mosbe
rger-consulting.com/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
"unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomovger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vge
r.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html