DOCSLIB.ORG

Reduced Instruction Set Computer an Introduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reduced Instruction Set Computer an Introduction Reduced instruction set computer an introduction Continue A processor that performs one instruction in the RISC's minimum hourly cycles redirects here. For other purposes, see RISC (disambigation). This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. Please help improve it to make it understandable to non-experts without deleting technical details. (October 2016) (Learn how and when to delete this template message) Sun UltraSPARC, a microprocessor RISC reduced computer set of instructions, or RISC (/rɪsk/), is a computer with a small, highly optimized set of instructions, rather than a more specialized set, often found in other types of architecture, such as a complex computer set of instructions (CISC). The main hallmark of the RISC architecture is the optimization of a set of instructions with a large number of registers and a highly regular line of instructions, allowing for a low number of hourly cycles per instruction (CPI). Another common feature of RISC is the load/shop architecture, in which memory is available through certain instructions, rather than as part of most of the instructions in the set. Although a number of computers of the 1960s and 1970s were identified as precursors to RISCs, the modern concept dates back to the 1980s. In particular, two projects at Stanford University and the University of California, Berkeley are most associated with the popularization of this concept. Stanford MIPS will continue to commercialize as a successful MIPS architecture, while RISC Berkeley gave its name to the entire concept and was commercialized as SPARC. Other successes of this era were IBM's efforts, which eventually led to the architecture of ibm's POWER, PowerPC, and Power ISA. As these projects developed in the late 1980s and especially in the early 1990s, various similar projects flourished, an important force in the Unix workstation market, as well as built-in processors in laser printers, routers and similar products. Many varieties of RISC designs include ARC, Alpha, Am29000, ARM, Atmel AVR, Blackfin, i860, i960, M88000, MIPS, PA-RISC, Power ISA (including PowerPC), RISC-V, SuperH, and SPARC. The use of ARM processors in smartphones and tablets, such as iPad and Android devices, has provided a broad user base for RISC-based systems. RISC processors are also used in supercomputers such as Fugaku, which is the fastest supercomputer in the world from June 2020. The history and development of Alan Turing's 1946 Automatic Computing Engine (ACE) design had many characteristics of the RISC architecture. A number of systems, in the 1960s, were credited as the first RISC architecture, partly based on their use load/shop approach. The term RISC was coined by David Patterson of the RISC project Berkeley, though, several similar concepts have appeared before. CDC 6600 developed by Seymour Kray in 1964 a download/shop architecture with only two address modes (registration and registration) and 74 work codes, with a base cycle of hours 10 times faster than the time of access to memory. Partly because of the optimized load architecture/store of the CDC 6600, Jack Dongarra says it can be considered a precursor to modern RISC systems, although a number of other technical barriers need to be overcome to develop the modern RISC system. IBM PowerPC 601 RISC Microprocessor Michael Flynn sees the first RISC system as the IBM 801 design, launched in 1975 by John Koke and completed in 1980. The 801 was eventually released in the form of a single chip, like IBM ROMP in 1981, which was behind the OPD Research (Office Products Department) Microprocessor. This processor was designed for mini tasks and was also used in the IBM RT PC in 1986, which turned out to be a commercial failure. But the 801 inspired several research projects, including new ones at IBM, that eventually led to the architecture of IBM POWER's set of instructions. In the mid-1970s, researchers (particularly IBM's John Cowock and similar projects elsewhere) demonstrated that most combinations of these orthogonal address modes and instructions were not used by most of the programs generated by compilers available at the time. In many cases, it has proved difficult to write a compiler with more than limited ability to take advantage of the functions provided by conventional processors. It was also found that when some architectures are microcoding, complex operations tend to be slower than a sequence of simpler operations that do the same. This was partly a consequence of the fact that many projects were hasty, with little time to optimize or customize each instruction; optimized only those that are used most often, and the sequence of these instructions may be faster than the less configured instruction, performing the equivalent operation as this sequence. One infamous example is the VAX INDEX instruction. As mentioned elsewhere, basic memory has long been slower than many CPU projects. The advent of semiconductor memory reduced this difference, but it was still clear that more registers (and then caches) would allow for higher processor speeds. Additional registers would require significant areas of the chip or board, which at the time (1975) could be available if the complexity of the processor logic was reduced. The most public projects of RISC, however, were the results of university research programs launched with the funding of the DARPA VLSI program. The VLSI program, virtually unknown today, has led to a huge number of advances in chip design, manufacturing and even computer The Berkeley RISC project was launched in 1980 under the direction of David Patterson and Carlo H. Payet. Berkeley RISC was based on receiving a receipt of using pipelines and aggressive use of a method known as window registration. The traditional processor has a small number of registers, and the program can use any register at any time. There are a huge number of registers in the registration window processor, for example, 128, but programs can only use a small number of them, for example, eight, at any given time. A program that limits itself to eight registers per procedure can make very quick procedural calls: the call simply moves the window down by eight, to a set of eight registers used by this procedure, and the return moves the window back. The Berkeley RISC project delivered the RISC-I processor in 1982. Comprised of only 44,420 transistors (compared to an average of about 100,000 in new CISC era designs) RISC-I had only 32 instructions, and at the same time completely surpassed any other single chip design. They followed this with a 40,760 transistor, 39 by the RISC-II instruction in 1983, which ran over three times as fast as the RISC-I. The MIPS project grew from John L. Hennessy's postgraduate studies at Stanford University in 1981, resulting in the launch of the system in 1983, and by 1984 it was possible to run simple programs. MiPS's approach highlighted the aggressive cycle of hours and the use of the pipeline, making sure that it can be launched as full as possible. MIPS was followed by MIPS-X, and in 1984 Hennessy and his colleagues formed MIPS Computer Systems. The commercial enterprise led to the creation of a new architecture, also called MIPS and the R2000 microprocessor, in 1985. Prototype chip RISC-V (2013). In the early 1980s, the concept of RISC was a significant uncertainty, and it was not clear whether it could have a commercial future, but by the mid-1980s these concepts had matured on a sufficiently commercially viable basis. In 1986, Hewlett Packard began using the early implementation of its PA-RISC in some of its computers. Meanwhile, Berkeley RISC's efforts became so famous that they eventually became a name for the whole concept and in 1987 Sun Microsystems began supplying systems with a SPARC processor directly based on the Berkeley RISC-II system. The U.S. Government Committee on Innovation in Computing and Communications attributes the recognition of the viability of the RISC concept to the success of the SPARC system. The success of SPARC renewed interest in IBM, which released new RISC systems by 1990, and by 1995 RISC processors had become the backbone of the $15 billion server industry. Since 2010, a new open source instructional (ISA) architecture, RISC-V, has been under development at the University of California, Berkeley, for research purposes and as a alternatives to nonfree ISAs. By 2014, version 2 of the isA user space has been corrected. ISA designed to be elongated from the core of barebones barebones For a small built-in processor for the use of supercomputers and cloud computing with standard and chip designer defined extensions and coprocessors. It has been tested in a silicon design with ROCKET SoC, which is also available as an open source generator in chisel. Characteristics and Design Philosophy This section requires additional citations to test. Please help improve this article by adding quotes to reliable sources. Non-sources of materials can be challenged and removed. (March 2012) (Learn how and when to delete this message template) Additional information: Processor Design Instruction set philosophy General misunderstanding of the phrase abbreviated instruction set of the computer is a misguided idea that the instructions are simply eliminated, resulting in a smaller set of instructions. In fact, over the years, RISC's set of instructions has grown in size, and today many of them have a larger set of instructions than many CISC processors. Some RISC processors, such as PowerPC, have set of instructions as large as, for example, CISC IBM System/370; Conversely, the DEC PDP-8 is obviously a CISC processor, because many of its instructions include multiple memory access, only 8 basic instructions and several extended instructions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Robust Architectural Support for Transactional Memory in the Power Architecture
    Robust Architectural Support for Transactional Memory in the Power Architecture Harold W. Cain∗ Brad Frey Derek Williams IBM Research IBM STG IBM STG Yorktown Heights, NY, USA Austin, TX, USA Austin, TX, USA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Maged M. Michael Cathy May Hung Le IBM Research IBM Research (retired) IBM STG Yorktown Heights, NY, USA Yorktown Heights, NY, USA Austin, TX, USA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT in current p795 systems, with 8 TB of DRAM), as well as On the twentieth anniversary of the original publication [10], strengths in RAS that differentiate it in the market, adding following ten years of intense activity in the research lit- TM must not compromise any of these virtues. A robust erature, hardware support for transactional memory (TM) system is one that is sturdy in construction, a trait that has finally become a commercial reality, with HTM-enabled does not usually come to mind in respect to HTM systems. chips currently or soon-to-be available from many hardware We structured TM to work in harmony with features that vendors. In this paper we describe architectural support for support the architecture's scalability. Our goal has been to TM provide a comprehensive programming environment includ- TM added to a future version of the Power ISA . Two im- ing support for simple system calls and debug aids, while peratives drove the development: the desire to complement providing a robust (in the sense of "no surprises") execu- our weakly-consistent memory model with a more friendly tion environment with reasonably consistent performance interface to simplify the development and porting of multi- and without unexpected transaction failures.2 TM must be threaded applications, and the need for robustness beyond usable throughout the system stack: in hypervisors, oper- that of some early implementations.
    [Show full text]
  • Modelling the Armv8 Architecture, Operationally: Concurrency and ISA
    Modelling the ARMv8 Architecture, Operationally: Concurrency and ISA Shaked Flur1 Kathryn E. Gray1 Christopher Pulte1 Susmit Sarkar2 Ali Sezgin1 Luc Maranget3 Will Deacon4 Peter Sewell1 1 University of Cambridge, UK 2 University of St Andrews, UK 3 INRIA, France 4 ARM Ltd., UK [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract Keywords Relaxed Memory Models, semantics, ISA In this paper we develop semantics for key aspects of the ARMv8 multiprocessor architecture: the concurrency model and much of the 64-bit application-level instruction set (ISA). Our goal is to 1. Introduction clarify what the range of architecturally allowable behaviour is, and The ARM architecture is the specification of a wide range of pro- thereby to support future work on formal verification, analysis, and cessors: cores designed by ARM that are integrated into devices testing of concurrent ARM software and hardware. produced by many other vendors, and cores designed ab initio by Establishing such models with high confidence is intrinsically ARM architecture partners, such as Nvidia and Qualcomm. The difficult: it involves capturing the vendor’s architectural intent, as- architecture defines the properties on which software can rely on, pects of which (especially for concurrency) have not previously identifying an envelope of behaviour that all these processors are been precisely defined. We therefore first develop a concurrency supposed to conform to. It is thus a central interface in the industry, model with a microarchitectural flavour, abstracting from many between those hardware vendors and software developers. It is also hardware implementation concerns but still close to hardware- a desirable target for software verification and analysis: software designer intuition.
    [Show full text]
  • Computer Architectures an Overview
    Computer Architectures An Overview PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 22:35:32 UTC Contents Articles Microarchitecture 1 x86 7 PowerPC 23 IBM POWER 33 MIPS architecture 39 SPARC 57 ARM architecture 65 DEC Alpha 80 AlphaStation 92 AlphaServer 95 Very long instruction word 103 Instruction-level parallelism 107 Explicitly parallel instruction computing 108 References Article Sources and Contributors 111 Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 113 Article Licenses License 114 Microarchitecture 1 Microarchitecture In computer engineering, microarchitecture (sometimes abbreviated to µarch or uarch), also called computer organization, is the way a given instruction set architecture (ISA) is implemented on a processor. A given ISA may be implemented with different microarchitectures.[1] Implementations might vary due to different goals of a given design or due to shifts in technology.[2] Computer architecture is the combination of microarchitecture and instruction set design. Relation to instruction set architecture The ISA is roughly the same as the programming model of a processor as seen by an assembly language programmer or compiler writer. The ISA includes the execution model, processor registers, address and data formats among other things. The Intel Core microarchitecture microarchitecture includes the constituent parts of the processor and how these interconnect and interoperate to implement the ISA. The microarchitecture of a machine is usually represented as (more or less detailed) diagrams that describe the interconnections of the various microarchitectural elements of the machine, which may be everything from single gates and registers, to complete arithmetic logic units (ALU)s and even larger elements.
    [Show full text]
  • Outline What Makes a Good ISA? Programmability Implementability
    Outline What Makes a Good ISA? • Instruction Sets in General • Programmability • MIPS Assembly Programming • Easy to express programs efficiently? • Other Instruction Sets • Implementability • Goals of ISA Design • Easy to design high-performance implementations (i.e., microarchitectures)? • RISC vs. CISC • Intel x86 (IA-32) • Compatibility • Easy to maintain programmability as languages and programs evolve? • Easy to maintain implementability as technology evolves? © 2012 Daniel J. Sorin 66 © 2012 Daniel J. Sorin 67 from Roth and Lebeck from Roth and Lebeck Programmability Implementability • Easy to express programs efficiently? • Every ISA can be implemented • For whom? • But not every ISA can be implemented well • Human • Bad ISA bad microarchitecture (slow, power-hungry, etc.) • Want high-level coarse-grain instructions • As similar to HLL as possible • We’d like to use some of these high-performance • This is the way ISAs were pre-1985 implementation techniques • Compilers were terrible, most code was hand-assembled • Pipelining, parallel execution, out-of-order execution • Compiler • We’ll discuss these later in the semester • Want low-level fine-grain instructions • Compiler can’t tell if two high-level idioms match exactly or not • Certain ISA features make these difficult • This is the way most post-1985 ISAs are • Variable length instructions • Optimizing compilers generate much better code than humans • Implicit state (e.g., condition codes) • ICQ: Why are compilers better than humans? • Wide variety of instruction formats © 2012 Daniel J. Sorin 68 © 2012 Daniel J. Sorin 69 from Roth and Lebeck from Roth and Lebeck Compatibility Compatibility in the Age of VMs • Few people buy new hardware … if it means they have to • Virtual machine (VM) : piece of software that emulates buy new software, too behavior of hardware platform • Intel was the first company to realize this • Examples: VMWare, Xen, Simics • ISA must stay stable, no matter what (microarch.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix K Survey of Instruction Set Architectures
    K.1 Introduction K-2 K.2 A Survey of RISC Architectures for Desktop, Server, and Embedded Computers K-3 K.3 The Intel 80x86 K-30 K.4 The VAX Architecture K-50 K.5 The IBM 360/370 Architecture for Mainframe Computers K-69 K.6 Historical Perspective and References K-75 K Survey of Instruction Set Architectures RISC: any computer announced after 1985. Steven Przybylski A Designer of the Stanford MIPS K-2 ■ Appendix K Survey of Instruction Set Architectures K.1 Introduction This appendix covers 10 instruction set architectures, some of which remain a vital part of the IT industry and some of which have retired to greener pastures. We keep them all in part to show the changes in fashion of instruction set architecture over time. We start with eight RISC architectures, using RISC V as our basis for compar- ison. There are billions of dollars of computers shipped each year for ARM (includ- ing Thumb-2), MIPS (including microMIPS), Power, and SPARC. ARM dominates in both the PMD (including both smart phones and tablets) and the embedded markets. The 80x86 remains the highest dollar-volume ISA, dominating the desktop and the much of the server market. The 80x86 did not get traction in either the embed- ded or PMD markets, and has started to lose ground in the server market. It has been extended more than any other ISA in this book, and there are no plans to stop it soon. Now that it has made the transition to 64-bit addressing, we expect this architecture to be around, although it may play a smaller role in the future then it did in the past 30 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Power Struggles: Revisiting the RISC Vs. CISC Debate On
    Appears in the 19th IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA 2013) 1 Power Struggles: Revisiting the RISC vs. CISC Debate on Contemporary ARM and x86 Architectures Emily Blem, Jaikrishnan Menon, and Karthikeyan Sankaralingam University of Wisconsin - Madison fblem,menon,[email protected] Abstract design complexity were previously the primary constraints, en- ergy and power constraints now dominate. Third, from a com- RISC vs. CISC wars raged in the 1980s when chip area and mercial standpoint, both ISAs are appearing in new markets: processor design complexity were the primary constraints and ARM-based servers for energy efficiency and x86-based mo- desktops and servers exclusively dominated the computing land- bile and low power devices for higher performance. Thus, the scape. Today, energy and power are the primary design con- question of whether ISA plays a role in performance, power, or straints and the computing landscape is significantly different: energy efficiency is once again important. growth in tablets and smartphones running ARM (a RISC ISA) is surpassing that of desktops and laptops running x86 (a CISC Related Work: Early ISA studies are instructive, but miss ISA). Further, the traditionally low-power ARM ISA is enter- key changes in today’s microprocessors and design constraints ing the high-performance server market, while the traditionally that have shifted the ISA’s effect. We review previous com- high-performance x86 ISA is entering the mobile low-power de- parisons in chronological order, and observe that all prior com- vice market. Thus, the question of whether ISA plays an intrinsic prehensive ISA studies considering commercially implemented role in performance or energy efficiency is becoming important, processors focused exclusively on performance.
    [Show full text]
  • POWER® Instruction Set Architecture(ISA): Openpower Profile Revision 1.0.0 (2016-02-17) Copyright © 2016 Openpower Foundation
    www.openpowerfoundation.org POWER® Instruction Set February 17, 2016 Revision 1.0.0 Architecture(ISA) POWER® Instruction Set Architecture(ISA): OpenPOWER Profile Revision 1.0.0 (2016-02-17) Copyright © 2016 OpenPOWER Foundation All capitalized terms in the following text have the meanings assigned to them in the OpenPOWER Intellectual Property Rights Poli- cy (the "OpenPOWER IPR Policy"). The full Policy may be found at the OpenPOWER website or are available upon request. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise ex- plain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published, and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this section are included on all such copies and derivative works. Howev- er, this document itself may not be modified in any way, including by removing the copyright notice or references to OpenPOWER, except as needed for the purpose of developing any document or deliverable produced by an OpenPOWER Work Group (in which case the rules applicable to copyrights, as set forth in the OpenPOWER IPR Policy, must be followed) or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by OpenPOWER or its successors or assigns. This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis AND TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMIT- TED BY APPLICABLE LAW, THE OpenPOWER Foundation AS WELL AS THE AUTHORS AND DEVELOPERS OF THIS STAN- DARDS FINAL DELIVERABLE OR OTHER DOCUMENT HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL OTHER WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS, EITHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES, DUTIES OR CONDITIONS OF MERCHANTABILITY, OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OF ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF RESPONSES, OF RESULTS, OF WORKMANLIKE EFFORT, OF LACK OF VIRUSES, OF LACK OF NEGLIGENCE OR NON- INFRINGEMENT.
    [Show full text]
  • The Design of Scalar AES Instruction Set Extensions for RISC-V
    The design of scalar AES Instruction Set Extensions for RISC-V Ben Marshall1, G. Richard Newell2, Dan Page1, Markku-Juhani O. Saarinen3 and Claire Wolf4 1 Department of Computer Science, University of Bristol {ben.marshall,daniel.page}@bristol.ac.uk 2 Microchip Technology Inc., USA [email protected] 3 PQShield, UK [email protected] 4 Symbiotic EDA [email protected] Abstract. Secure, efficient execution of AES is an essential requirement on most computing platforms. Dedicated Instruction Set Extensions (ISEs) are often included for this purpose. RISC-V is a (relatively) new ISA that lacks such a standardised ISE. We survey the state-of-the-art industrial and academic ISEs for AES, implement and evaluate five different ISEs, one of which is novel. We recommend separate ISEs for 32 and 64-bit base architectures, with measured performance improvements for an AES-128 block encryption of 4× and 10× with a hardware cost of 1.1K and 8.2K gates respectivley, when compared to a software-only implementation based on use of T-tables. We also explore how the proposed standard bit-manipulation extension to RISC-V can be harnessed for efficient implementation of AES-GCM. Our work supports the ongoing RISC-V cryptography extension standardisation process. Keywords: ISE, AES, RISC-V 1 Introduction Implementing the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES). Compared to more general workloads, cryptographic algorithms like AES present a significant implementation chal- lenge. They involve computationally intensive and specialised functionality, are used in a wide range of contexts, and form a central target in a complex attack surface. The demand for efficiency (however measured) is an example of this challenge in two ways.
    [Show full text]
  • Altivec Technology Programming Environments Manual for Power ISA Processors
    AltiVec Technology Programming Environments Manual for Power ISA Processors ALTIVECPOWERISAPEM Rev 0 06/2014 How to Reach Us: Information in this document is provided solely to enable system and software Home Page: implementers to use Freescale products. There are no express or implied copyright freescale.com licenses granted hereunder to design or fabricate any integrated circuits based on the Web Support: information in this document. freescale.com/support Freescale reserves the right to make changes without further notice to any products herein. Freescale makes no warranty, representation, or guarantee regarding the suitability of its products for any particular purpose, nor does Freescale assume any liability arising out of the application or use of any product or circuit, and specifically disclaims any and all liability, including without limitation consequential or incidental damages. “Typical” parameters that may be provided in Freescale data sheets and/or specifications can and do vary in different applications, and actual performance may vary over time. All operating parameters, including “typicals,” must be validated for each customer application by customer’s technical experts. Freescale does not convey any license under its patent rights nor the rights of others. Freescale sells products pursuant to standard terms and conditions of sale, which can be found at the following address: freescale.com/SalesTermsandConditions Freescale, the Freescale logo, AltiVec, C-5, CodeTest, CodeWarrior, ColdFire, C-Ware, Energy Efficient Solutions logo, Kinetis, mobileGT, PowerQUICC, Processor Expert, QorIQ, Qorivva, StarCore, Symphony, and VortiQa are trademarks of Freescale Semiconductor, Inc., Reg. U.S. Pat. & Tm. Off. Airfast, BeeKit, BeeStack, ColdFire+, CoreNet, Flexis, MagniV, MXC, Platform in a Package, QorIQ Qonverge, QUICC Engine, Ready Play, SafeAssure, SMARTMOS, TurboLink, Vybrid, and Xtrinsic are trademarks of Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Performance Optimization and Tuning Techniques for IBM Power Systems Processors Including IBM POWER8
    Front cover Performance Optimization and Tuning Techniques for IBM Power Systems Processors Including IBM POWER8 Peter Bergner Bernard King Smith Brian Hall Julian Wang Alon Shalev Housfater Suresh Warrier Madhusudanan Kandasamy David Wendt Tulio Magno Alex Mericas Steve Munroe Mauricio Oliveira Bill Schmidt Will Schmidt Redbooks International Technical Support Organization Performance Optimization and Tuning Techniques for IBM Power Systems Processors Including IBM POWER8 August 2015 SG24-8171-01 Note: Before using this information and the product it supports, read the information in “Notices” on page ix. Second Edition (August 2015) This edition pertains to IBM Power Systems servers based on IBM Power Systems processor-based technology, including but not limited to IBM POWER8 processor-based systems. Specific software levels and firmware levels that are used are noted throughout the text. © Copyright International Business Machines Corporation 2014, 2015. All rights reserved. Note to U.S. Government Users Restricted Rights -- Use, duplication or disclosure restricted by GSA ADP Schedule Contract with IBM Corp. Contents Notices . ix Trademarks . .x IBM Redbooks promotions . xi Preface . xiii Authors. xiii Now you can become a published author, too! . xvii Comments welcome. xvii Stay connected to IBM Redbooks . xvii Summary of changes. xix August 2015, Second Edition. xix Chapter 1. Optimization and tuning on IBM POWER8 processor-based systems . 1 1.1 Introduction . 2 1.2 Outline of this guide . 2 1.3 Conventions that are used in this guide . 5 1.4 Background . 5 1.5 Optimizing performance on POWER8 processor-based systems. 6 1.5.1 Lightweight tuning and optimization guidelines. 7 1.5.2 Deployment guidelines .
    [Show full text]
  • Xilinx Logicore IP Virtex-5 APU Floating-Point Unit (V1.01A), Data Sheet
    LogiCORE IP Virtex-5 APU Floating-Point Unit (v1.01a) DS693 March 1, 2011 Product Specification Introduction LogiCORE IP Facts Table The Virtex®-5 Auxiliary Processor Unit (APU) Core Specifics Floating-Point Unit is an optimized FPU designed for Supported Virtex-5 the PowerPC® 440 embedded microprocessor of the Device Family Virtex-5 FXT FPGA family. The FPU implementation Supported User APU Interfaces provides support for IEEE-754 floating-point arithmetic Resources operations in single or double precision. Resources LUT-Reg DSP Blocks Block The FPU is not Power ISA compliant and does not Used Pairs RAMs support every instruction defined by the PowerPC Single 2620 3 0 processor instruction set architecture. The Double 4950 13 0 double-precision FPU configuration will support any -1 (high speed) 200 MHz compiler that allows graphics instructions (fsel, fres and -1 (low latency) 140 MHz frsqrte) to be disabled, which makes it compatible with Clock Speed -2 (high speed) 225 MHz all compilers and operating systems that currently -2 (low latency) 160 MHz support the Virtex-5 FXT family. Provided with Core The FPU is tightly coupled to the PowerPC processor Documentation Product Specification core with the APU interface. Software applications can Design Files VHDL use native PowerPC processor floating-point instructions to achieve typical speedups of 6x over Example Design Not Provided software emulation. Test Bench Not Provided Constraints File Automatically generated UCF Simulation Features Model VHDL • Compatible with the IEEE-754 standard for single- Tested Design Tools and double-precision floating-point arithmetic, Design Entry 13.1 EDK with minor and documented exceptions Tools • Decodes and executes standard PowerPC Simulation ModelSim PE/SE 6.6c or higher processor floating-point instructions Synthesis Tools XST • Optimized for 2:1 and 3:1 APU:CPU clock ratios, Support allowing PowerPC processor to operate at Provided by Xilinx, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • ECE 152 / 496 Introduction to Computer Architecture Instruction Set Architecture (ISA) Benjamin C
    ECE 152 / 496 Introduction to Computer Architecture Instruction Set Architecture (ISA) Benjamin C. Lee Duke University Slides from Daniel Sorin (Duke) and are derived from work by Amir Roth (Penn) and Alvy Lebeck (Duke) Spring 2013 © 2012 Daniel J. Sorin from Roth and Lebeck Instruction Set Architecture (ISA) Application • ISAs in General OS • Using MIPS as primary example Compiler Firmware • MIPS Assembly Programming CPU I/O • Other ISAs Memory Digital Circuits Gates & Transistors © 2012 Daniel J. Sorin 2 from Roth and Lebeck Readings • Patterson and Hennessy • Chapter 2 • Read this chapter as if you’d have to teach it • Appendix A (reference for MIPS instructions and SPIM) • Read as much of this chapter as you feel you need © 2012 Daniel J. Sorin 3 from Roth and Lebeck What Is an ISA? • ISA • The “contract” between software and hardware • If software does X, hardware promises to do Y • Functional definition of operations, modes, and storage locations supported by hardware • Precise description of how software can invoke and access them • Strictly speaking, ISA is the architecture, i.e., the interface between the hardware and the software • Less strictly speaking, when people talk about architecture, they’re also talking about how the the architecture is implemented © 2012 Daniel J. Sorin 4 from Roth and Lebeck How Would You Design an ISA? • What kind of interface should the hardware present to the software? • Types of instructions? • Instruction representation? • How do we get from instruction 1 to 2 (or to 7 instead)? • Software’s view of storage? Where do variables live? • Does the hardware help to support function/method calls? If so, how? • Should the hardware support other features that are specific to certain HLLs (e.g., garbage collection for Java)? © 2012 Daniel J.
    [Show full text]