home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.arch
- Path: sparky!uunet!email!mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at!anton
- From: anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Martin Ertl)
- Subject: Re: trapping speculative ops (LONG)
- Message-ID: <1992Sep11.074838.26488@email.tuwien.ac.at>
- Sender: news@email.tuwien.ac.at
- Nntp-Posting-Host: mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at
- Organization: Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
- References: <1992Aug31.224611.5196@odin.diku.dk> <1992Sep1.143155.636@bcars64a.bnr.ca> <1992Sep9.121701.13208@odin.diku.dk> <id.G_3T.SH1@ferranti.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 07:48:38 GMT
- Lines: 14
-
- In article <id.G_3T.SH1@ferranti.com>, peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes:
- |> Isn't this (extra bits for exceptions) basically the whole point of NaNs and
- |> Infinities in IEEE FP? Is the IEEE method inadequate, or would it be reasonable
- |> to simply ignore FP interrupts and check for NaNs (assuming integer arithmetic
- |> has low enough latency it isn't a problem)?
-
- On a superscalar machine even a one-cycle latency is a problem.
- However, integer arithmetic causes no exceptions (in C), so what's the
- real problem? Loads.
-
- - anton
- --
- M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
- anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
-