Re: How about VLIW used as RISC?

Alex Colvin <alexc@std.com>
2 May 2004 21:48:52 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
How about VLIW used as RISC? ronald@interqos.com (2004-04-28)
Re: How about VLIW used as RISC? nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2004-04-29)
Re: How about VLIW used as RISC? ricardo.b@zmail.pt (Ricardo Bugalho) (2004-04-29)
Re: How about VLIW used as RISC? torbenm@diku.dk (2004-04-29)
Re: How about VLIW used as RISC? MitchAlsup@aol.com (2004-04-29)
Re: How about VLIW used as RISC? alexc@std.com (Alex Colvin) (2004-05-02)
Re: How about VLIW used as RISC? gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2004-05-02)
Re: How about VLIW used as RISC? stanlass@netins.net (Stan Lass) (2004-05-02)
Re: How about VLIW used as RISC? sander@haldjas.folklore.ee (Sander Vesik) (2004-05-08)
Re: How about VLIW used as RISC? ricardo.b@zmail.pt (Ricardo Bugalho) (2004-05-08)
Re: How about VLIW used as RISC? gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2004-05-09)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Alex Colvin <alexc@std.com>
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.compilers
Date: 2 May 2004 21:48:52 -0400
Organization: The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989
References: 04-04-088
Keywords: architecture
Posted-Date: 02 May 2004 21:48:52 EDT

>We have simple scalar RISC and superscalar RISC but why there is few
>or no VLIW used as an RISC for general application? There is criticism
>about code density. However, as many has pointed out, modern VLIW has
>already used compression to remove NOOP instruction in the instruction
>packet. I guess 40-bit instruction is enough hold the additional
>control information, such as predicate bits, p bits(for indicating the
>last instruction of the instruction packet).


You might find the old (circa 1990) WM design relevant.
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~wm/wm.html
sort of a narrow VLIW/RISC with two operations, three operands and one
result.


ANother answer might be that VLIW is hard to run out-of-order
--
mac the naïf

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.