DOCSLIB.ORG

Optimizing Processor Performance for Wintel Applications: a Case Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Optimizing Processor Performance for Wintel Applications: a Case Study Optimizing processor performance for Wintel applications: a case study Demand Technology Software 1020 Eighth Avenue South, Suite 6, Naples, FL 34102 phone: (941) 261-8945 fax: (941) 261-5456 e-mail:markf@ demandtech.com http://www.demandtech.com 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Application tuning case study ■ The target application is a C program written to perform interval performance data collection for Windows NT ♦ It is important that this program perform well because “If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.” ♦ Performance Analysts use our product, and they are very demanding customers 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 2 Application tuning case study ■ At a point in development where the code was reasonably mature and stable, I subjected it to performance analysis using several tools. ♦ Microsoft Visual C++ version 5 ♦ Rational Visual Quantify execution profiler ♦ Intel vTune version 2.5 optimization tool 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 3 Windows NT on Intel hardware ■ In order to use vTune effectively, it helps to understand how Intel processor hardware works ♦ extensive Intel processor documentation ships on the product CD ■ Target environment: ♦ Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 ♦ Intel Pentium and Pentium Pro hardware 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 4 NT performance monitoring ■ Performance SeNTrytm collection agent initialization loop until cycle end = TRUE; Win32 API calls to retrieve performance data; calculate; Write data to file; end loop; 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 5 Win32 performance monitoring API ■ Familiar and well-documented interface ♦ The only programmatic way to enumerate the Processes running on an NT system ♦ NT Performance data is structured as ■ Objects (records) ■ Counters (fields) ♦ Collection agents are associated with Objects ■ NT base Objects, including kernel Objects ■ extended Objects require a Perflib dll 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 6 Data C ollection sets ■ Define proper subsets of a Master C ollection set ♦ Defines all known Objects and Counters ♦ Some Objects are instanced: there can be multiple occurrences of instanced O bjects ♦ Two Parent:Child relationships defined ■ Process is the parent of Thread ■ Physical Disk is the parent of Logical Disk 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 7 Data C ollection sets ■ Performance considerations ♦ Data collection is performed one Object at a time ■ This was necessary due to a bug in the Win32 collection services ■ An n:1 correspondence between Objects and their associated collection routines ♦ With the exception of C hild O bjects ■ They are collected at the same time as the Parent Objects ♦ There are many instances of some Objects ■ Process and Thread 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 8 Data C ollection sets ■ Performance considerations ♦ There are compelling reasons why data collection should be done at frequent intervals ■ identified by Buzen and Shum, 1996 ♦ Performance data for processes that terminate before the end of the interval is lost ♦ one collection interval used for both Accumulator C ounters (processor time) and Instantaneous Counters (e.g., processor Queue length) 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 9 Data C ollection sets ■ Performance considerations ♦ Ideally, collection should be performed at least once per minute; ♦ possibly, some Objects could be collected even more frequently in order to accumulate samples of Instantaneous C ounter values ♦ Can our code handle it? 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 10 Goals of the tuning exercise ■ Profile our code execution path so that we can understand it better ♦ Profilers eliminate a lot of idle speculation about what your code is doing ■ Better understand the Win32 services and their interaction with our code ♦ We cannot changes these services, but perhaps we can interact with them in better ways 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 11 Goals of the tuning exercise ■ Evaluate code optimization strategies ♦ optimizing Compiler options ■ Pentium and Pentium Pro specific optimizations ♦ In-line assembler ♦ Code restructuring ♦ etc. ■ Feed results forward into the development process 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 12 VC++ code profiler ■ Built-in compiler option ■ Times program functions during run time ♦ Must run the application under the debugger ■ Creates a text report showing: ♦ F unction time ♦ Function+Child Function time ♦ Hit Count ■ Example: DefaultCollectionSet once per second 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 13 VC++ code profiler output Module Statistics for dmperfss.exe ---------------------------------- Time in module: 283541.261 millisecond Percent of time in module: 100.0% Functions in module: 155 Hits in module: 11616795 Module function coverage: 72.3% Func Func+Child Hit Time % Time % Count Function --------------------------------------------------------- 248146.507 87.5 248146.507 87.5 249 _WaitOnEvent (dmwrdata.obj) 8795.822 3.1 8795.822 3.1 393329 _WriteDataToFile (dmwrdata. 4413.518 1.6 4413.518 1.6 2750 _GetPerfDataFromRegistry (dm 3281.442 1.2 8153.656 2.9 170615 _FormatWriteThisObjectCount 3268.991 1.2 12737.758 4.5 96912 _FindPreviousObjectInstanceC 2951.455 1.0 2951.455 1.0 3330628 _NextCounterDef (dmwrdata.ob 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 14 VC++ profiler: Observations ■ Our program is “sleeping” 87.5% of the time! ■ Can only look at your program’s code ♦ If your function is spending all its time making Win32 API calls or calling other dlls, they are not visible ■ Parent-child relationships among modules are not readily apparent 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 15 Rational Visual Quantify ■ Add-on product ♦ Visual Studio “integration” ■ Select profiling at the level of the function call or the line ■ Adds instrumentation to each module during the runtime session ♦ Includes all shareable and relocatable exes and dlls called by your program! 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 16 Rational Visual Quantify ■ Reporting ♦ graphic view of your program’s critical execution path ■ breaks out dlls and some system services ♦ parent-child relationships among modules is explicit ♦ convenient navigation between views ■ Performs analysis of ∆ between two execution runs 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 17 Rational Visual Quantify 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 20 Rational VQ: Observations ■ Added instrumentation affects absolute function time values observed ♦ We only spent 32% of our time “Sleeping” ♦ relative timing relationship between functions appear unaffected ■ App is very intuitive and easy to use ♦ e.g., relationships between function calls ■ Ability to trace module execution through 3rd party functions can be very useful! 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 23 Intel vTune ■ Standalone execution profiler ■ Relies on system-wide sampling ♦ maps the location of the Program C ounter to the module in memory ♦ catches every program, including the OS ■ Optionally, can also be used to report on the Pentium/Pentium Pro performance metrics during program execution 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 24 Intel vTune ■ High percentage of samples showed NT running the Idle Thread! ■ Switched to Master Collection set once per second to generate more activity ♦ Rational VQ overhead was too high to perform a comparable test ♦ R esult: very different profile of activity 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 26 Intel vTune ■ Hotspot analysis showed two functions accounted for > 70% of the activity inside our process address space ♦ NextInstanceDef ♦ IsPreviousAndParentSameInstance ■ vTune analyzes x86 assembler code to assist you in taking advantage of the superscalar features of the P5 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 28 Intel processor performance overview ■ Complex Instruction set (CISC) ♦ Maintain upward compatibility with original 8-bit 8080 instruction set ■ With improvements in semiconductor fabrication, add ♦ pipelining, TLB, cache, branch prediction ■ 486 ♦ elements of RISC superscalar processors ■ Pentium, Pentium Pro 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 29 Intel processor evolution Processor Year Clock Speed Bus Width Addressable Transistors (MHz) (bits) Mem or y 8080 1974 2 8 64K 6,000 8086 1978 5-10 16 1 MB 29,000 8088 1979 5-8 8 1 MB 29,000 80286 1982 8-12 16 16 MB 134,000 386 DX 1985 16-33 32 4 GB 275,000 486 DX 1989 25-50 32 4 GB 1,200,000 Pentium 1993 60-233 32 4 GB 3,100,000 Pentium Pro 1995 150-200 64 4 GB 5,500,000 Pentium II 1997 233-333 64 4 GB 7,500,000 1998 Demand Technology, Inc. Wintel application tuning: processor optimization 30 Intel processor evolution Processor Highlights 8080 1 chip microprocessor 8086 10X performance 8080 8088 8 bit version of 8086 80286 Virtual
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bringing Virtualization to the X86 Architecture with the Original Vmware Workstation
    12 Bringing Virtualization to the x86 Architecture with the Original VMware Workstation EDOUARD BUGNION, Stanford University SCOTT DEVINE, VMware Inc. MENDEL ROSENBLUM, Stanford University JEREMY SUGERMAN, Talaria Technologies, Inc. EDWARD Y. WANG, Cumulus Networks, Inc. This article describes the historical context, technical challenges, and main implementation techniques used by VMware Workstation to bring virtualization to the x86 architecture in 1999. Although virtual machine monitors (VMMs) had been around for decades, they were traditionally designed as part of monolithic, single-vendor architectures with explicit support for virtualization. In contrast, the x86 architecture lacked virtualization support, and the industry around it had disaggregated into an ecosystem, with different ven- dors controlling the computers, CPUs, peripherals, operating systems, and applications, none of them asking for virtualization. We chose to build our solution independently of these vendors. As a result, VMware Workstation had to deal with new challenges associated with (i) the lack of virtual- ization support in the x86 architecture, (ii) the daunting complexity of the architecture itself, (iii) the need to support a broad combination of peripherals, and (iv) the need to offer a simple user experience within existing environments. These new challenges led us to a novel combination of well-known virtualization techniques, techniques from other domains, and new techniques. VMware Workstation combined a hosted architecture with a VMM. The hosted architecture enabled a simple user experience and offered broad hardware compatibility. Rather than exposing I/O diversity to the virtual machines, VMware Workstation also relied on software emulation of I/O devices. The VMM combined a trap-and-emulate direct execution engine with a system-level dynamic binary translator to ef- ficiently virtualize the x86 architecture and support most commodity operating systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Apple Computer: the Iceo Seizes the Internet
    UC Irvine Globalization of I.T. Title Apple Computer: The iCEO Seizes the Internet Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4sq9672p Author West, Joel Publication Date 2002-10-01 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Apple Computer: The iCEO Seizes the Internet October 2002 JOEL WEST Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations University of California, Irvine CRITO (Center for Research on Information Technology and Organization) University of California, Irvine 3200 Berkeley Place North Irvine, California 92697-4650 949.824.6387 Tel. 949.824.8091 Fax [email protected] ______________________________________________________________________________ Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations University of California, Irvine | www.crito.uci.edu Apple Computer: The iCEO Seizes the Internet Joel West <[email protected]> Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations University of California, Irvine http://www.crito.uci.edu/ October 20, 2002 Contents 1. From Innovation to Crisis...................................................................................... 2 Go-it Alone Standards Strategy .....................................................................3 Failure to Respond to Windows Challenge.................................................... 3 2. Revised Business Strategy .....................................................................................4 Technology....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Standard Based Monopolies and Near Monpolies: the Wintel Example
    Standard Based Monopolies and Near Monopolies: The WinTel Example By John F. McGowan, Ph.D. May 3, 1999 Abstract Standard-based monopolies and near monopolies are based on control of de facto industry standards. Usually the monopolist’s product or service is a component of or comprises a network whose many components must work together to produce a useful result. Standardization of the components is required for the network to function. In such situations, customers may become locked into the network that they participate in. Even if a competing network exists, there is substantial cost and practical obstacles to converting to the competing network of products, services, and associated standards. A near monopolist can charge more than its costs and earn monopoly profits due to lock-in. Control of the de facto standards is often achieved and maintained through frequent arbitrary changes to the standards, usually marketed as technological innovation. Intellectual property rights such as patents may also be exploited. Microsoft and Intel are prominent current examples of near monopolies based on control of de facto standards. Introduction A monopoly is a single seller. A monopoly can earn monopoly profits because customers must either buy the product or service at the price set by the monopoly or not buy at all. In a market with many sellers, competition drives the price of a product or service down to the cost of the seller. With a single seller, the seller can charge a higher price than costs. The seller cannot charge any price because at some point the customers will simply not buy the product or service.
    [Show full text]
  • Wintel: Cooperation Or Conflict
    #05-083 Wintel: Cooperation or Conflict Ramon Casadesus-Masanell David B. Yoffie Copyright © 2005 Working papers are in draft form. This working paper is distributed for purposes of comment and discussion only. It may not be reproduced without permission of the copyright holder. Copies of working papers are available from the author. Wintel: Cooperation or Conflict∗ Ramon Casadesus-Masanell† David B. Yoffie‡ April 13, 2005 Abstract We study the incentives of complementors (producers of complementary products) to cooperate vs. compete and how these interact. In a system of complements, like the PC, the value of the final product depends on how well the different components work together. This, in turn, depends on the firms’ investment in complementary R&D. We ask whether profit maximizing complementors will fully cooperate to make the final product as valuable as possible. Contrary to the popular view that two tight complements will generally have well aligned incentives, we demonstrate that natural conflicts emerge over pricing, the timing of investments, and who captures the greatest value at different phases of product generations. Preliminary draft ∗We thank Vicente Salas Fumás, Michal Pozarzycki, Ana Sotelo, and seminar participants at IESE’s ‘Brown Bag’ series for helpful comments. †Harvard Business School and IESE Business School ‡Harvard Business School 1 1 Introduction Intel and Microsoft are perhaps the best known pair of complementary firms in the world. More than 80% of the personal computers worldwide ship with an Intel microprocessor running Microsoft’s Windows operating system. Since 1980, when IBM chose both Intel and Microsoft as the core components of the first IBM PC, Intel and Microsoft have been joined at the hip.
    [Show full text]
  • "Design Rules, Volume 2: How Technology Shapes Organizations
    Design Rules, Volume 2: How Technology Shapes Organizations Chapter 17 The Wintel Standards-based Platform Carliss Y. Baldwin Working Paper 20-055 Design Rules, Volume 2: How Technology Shapes Organizations Chapter 17 The Wintel Standards-based Platform Carliss Y. Baldwin Harvard Business School Working Paper 20-055 Copyright © 2019 by Carliss Y. Baldwin Working papers are in draft form. This working paper is distributed for purposes of comment and discussion only. It may not be reproduced without permission of the copyright holder. Copies of working papers are available from the author. Funding for this research was provided in part by Harvard Business School. © Carliss Y. Baldwin Comments welcome. Please do not circulate or quote. Design Rules, Volume 2: How Technology Shapes Organizations Chapter 17 The Wintel Standards-based Platform By Carliss Y. Baldwin Note to Readers: This is a draft of Chapter 17 of Design Rules, Volume 2: How Technology Shapes Organizations. It builds on prior chapters, but I believe it is possible to read this chapter on a stand-alone basis. The chapter may be cited as: Baldwin, C. Y. (2019) “The Wintel Standards-based Platform,” HBS Working Paper (November 2019). I would be most grateful for your comments on any aspect of this chapter! Thank you in advance, Carliss. Abstract The purpose of this chapter is to use the theory of bottlenecks laid out in previous chapters to better understand the dynamics of an open standards-based platform. I describe how the Wintel platform evolved from 1990 through 2000 under joint sponsorship of Intel and Microsoft. I first describe a series of technical bottlenecks that arose in the early 1990s concerning the “bus architecture” of IBM-compatible PCs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dynamic Capabilities View of Coopetition: the Case of Intel, Apple and Microsoft
    The Dynamic Capabilities View of Coopetition: The Case of Intel, Apple and Microsoft Chiara Di Guardo Marco Galvagno University of Cagliari University of Catania 2nd EIASM Workshop on Coopetition Strategy Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy, Sept. 14-15, 2006 Summary Research overview Research questions Lenses for investigation Conceptual Framework Narrative case study Conclusions Contribution and limitations Research overview The paradoxical relationship between cooperation and competition What we already know: Competitors can cooperate and become both more competitive Coopetitive firms have the capability to manage cooperation and competition better than peers or competitors. What we don’t know well: How such a capability develops within a firm? Would it be possible for very good partners to become competitors? Research overview (cont’d) Overarching research question Cooperation Competition ? Research overview (cont’d) Motivations Increasing importance of coopetition as a strategic device : Coopetition have a positive effect on firms’ performance Coopetition as a way to renew organizations and prevent competency traps Coopetition as a strategy to cope with turbulent environments Research questions: How do firms develop coopetitive strategies? Partially convergent interest structure [Dagnino and Padula, 2006] What drives a firm’s decision to compete against a partner? Alliance competence or capability [Kale and Singh, 1999; Anand and Khanna, 2000; Kale et al., 2002; Lambe et al., 2002] Lenses for investigation
    [Show full text]
  • IJREISS Volume2, Issue 6(June 2012) ISSN: 2250-0588 A
    IJREISS Volume2, Issue 6(June 2012) ISSN: 2250-0588 A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN MACINTOSH AND WINDOWS OPERATING SYSTEM Nandita Goyal Bhatnagar Department of CSE, ABES College, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, INDIA Vishal Gupta Department of CSE, G. B. Pant Engineering College, Pauri, Uttarakhand, INDIA Anubha Chauhan Department of CSE, G. B. Pant Engineering College, Pauri, Uttarakhand, INDIA ABSTRACT In this paper, we're comparing Apple computers running Macintosh and computers running the Windows operating system. We also show the timeline of different releases of both types of systems. By this comparison, the usability and effectiveness of these computers are judged in different scenarios. Also, this paper contains the term PC which stands for personal computer and could apply to Macs, Windows machines and computers running other operating systems alike, we're using it in the common vernacular as shorthand for a Windows machine. Keywords- Operating System, Apple Macintosh, Windows, Security. International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT and Social Sciences www.indusedu.org 77 IJREISS Volume2, Issue 6(June 2012) ISSN: 2250-0588 I. INTRODUCTION The Macintosh or Mac, is a series of personal computers (PCs) designed, developed, and marketed by Apple Inc. The first Macintosh was introduced by Apple's then-chairman Steve Jobs on January 24, 1984; it was the first commercially successful personal computer to feature a mouse and a graphical user interface rather than a command-line interface. The company continued to have success through the second half of the 1980s, first primarily because of the sales of the Apple II series remained strong even after the introduction of the Macintosh, only to see it dissipate in the 1990s as the personal computer market shifted toward the "Wintel" platform: IBM PC compatible machines running MS-DOS and Microsoft Windows.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Quantitative Computing
    Numerical Algorithms Group Title: The Future of Quantitative Computing Summary: Numerical Algorithms Group (NAG) recently announced they had been collaborating with Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) to produce math libraries for AMD’s next generation microprocessor- a 64-bit high performance chip named Opteron™. This paper includes the interview between Jim Finnegan, editor of Financial Engineering News, and Dr. Ian Reid, vice president of business development at NAG to discuss the significance of this announcement. Finnegan: So tell me more about your relationship with AMD based on their recent announcements? Reid: We’ve been working with AMD to develop the basic math libraries for their new 64-bit chips generically termed AMD64. On the one hand, there is a very basic math library all compilers need and it provides the likes of trigonometric functions (sine, cosine etc). What we’ve done with AMD is to make these functions very high performance and accurate. And let me stress “accurate” in that statement, because what we’ve found that some people emphasize computational speed over accuracy. They’ll come to us and say ‘Well, you are slower than Company X on these speed benchmarks.’ But we come back and say, ‘Well yes, but we get the right answer and they don’t. So, how fast do you want the wrong answer?’ It’s the combination of speed and accuracy that defines for us the most important metric which is computational efficiency. Finnegan: So is your basic math library to be used on the new AMD chip, is this something that is part of their new chip architecture? Reid: No.
    [Show full text]
  • 101 Ways to Save Apple by James Daly
    http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.06/apple_pr.html 101 Ways to Save Apple By James Daly An assessment of what can be done to fix a once-great company. Dear Apple, In the movie Independence Day, a PowerBook saves the earth from destruction. Now it's time to return the favor. Unfortunately, even devoted Mac addicts must admit that you look a little beleaguered these days: a confusing product line, little inspiration from the top, software developers fleeing. But who wants to live in a world without you? Not us. So we surveyed a cross section of hardcore Mac fans and came up with 101 ways to get you back on the path to salvation. We chose not to resort to time travel or regurgitate the same old shoulda/coulda/wouldas (you shoulda licensed your OS in 1987, for instance, or coulda upped your price/performance in 1993). We don't believe Apple is rotten to the core. Chrysler nearly went under in the late 1970s and came back to lead its industry. Here's a fresh assessment of what can be done to fix your once-great company using the material at hand. Don't wait for a miracle. You have the power to save the world - and yourself. Edited by James Daly 1. Admit it. You're out of the hardware game. Outsource your hardware production, or scrap it entirely, to compete more directly with Microsoft without the liability of manufacturing boxes. 2. License the Apple name/technology to appliance manufacturers and build GUIs for every possible device - from washing machines to telephones to WebTV.
    [Show full text]
  • Network Externalities in the Computer Operating Systems Market
    The Journal of Applied Business Research – First Quarter 2008 Volume 24, Number 1 The Effect Of Java On Network Benefits In Computer Software Markets Supriya Sarnikar, (E-mail: [email protected]), Westfield State College ABSTRACT In markets that exhibit network effects it is often believed that society gets inefficiently locked into an inferior technology. This paper utilizes data generated by a natural experiment, afforded by the introduction of the programming language Java, to test whether computer software markets are prone to inefficient lock-in. Findings from a hedonic price regression indicate that Java effectively increased the level of competition in the software applications market and lowered prices of applications software. The regression results are not consistent with the hypothesis of inefficient lock-in. INTRODUCTION n a recent antitrust action1 against Microsoft Corporation, it was argued that the large installed base of Microsoft‟s Windows operating system virtually guaranteed its continued dominance in the computer operating systems market. The market for computer software is widely believed to be characterized by Inetwork effects.2 Existing literature suggests that network effects lead to de-facto standardization and that the presence of a large installed base often leads to de-facto standardization and excess inertia in the adoption of new and superior technologies. See for eg., Farrell and Saloner(1986)3, Katz and Shapiro(1986), Arthur(1989) and, Mitchell and Skrzpacz(2006). Anecdotal and experimental evidence is provided in the literature which suggests that the technologies adopted in some markets such as typewriters (David, 1985), Video Cassette Recorders (Cusumano et.al., 1992), nuclear submarines (Cowan, 1990) etc., may have been inefficient because users were locked into inferior technologies in these markets.
    [Show full text]
  • Instruction Description Example Mov Eax,7 Mov Move Data Src -> Dst Mov Edx,[0Xf0ff] Add/Sub Add/Subtract Vals in Reg
    CS5600 - PC H/W & Assembly Overview • Hardware basics • PC Bootup Sequence • x86 basics • Intro to OS Hardware Basics • PC compatible, “Wintel" • alternatives: Amiga, PowePC, DEC Alpha, SPARC, etc. • 1981 IBM PC (compete with Apple) • 1982 Compaq IBM-compatible PC • 1985 IBM clones everywhere! • 1986 Compaq 80386-based PC • 1990s Wintel • x86, Pemtium I, II, III … • x86_64 AMD … tomorrow? Motherboard CPU I/O Memory BIOS South-Bridge • I/O between CPU, devices and MM North-Bridge • Coordinates access to MM Storage Connectors • (S)ATA Conceptually L1,+L2,+L3+ CPU(s) Cache All+devices+ compete+for+ access+to+memory North/South+ Graphics Memory Bridge Graphics+ Memory I/O I/O … I/O 16 Simplified CPU Layout Control Unit Instruction Decode ALU ALU FPU Registers Instruction Fetch Cache L1, L2, L3 System Bus Registers • Storage build into the CPU • Can hold valued or pointer • Instructions operate directly on registers • Load from memory • Load to memory Registers • Some registers are special • point to the current instruction in memory • point to top of the stack • configure low-level CPU features • … Memory Hierarchy x86_32 Registers x86 Registers • EIP • Points to currently executing instruction • EFLAGS • Think of it as scratch register, e.g., results after comparison, carry after addition. • Sometimes referred to as the machine status word register x86 instructions Instruction Description Example mov eax,7 mov Move data src -> dst mov edx,[0xF0FF] add/sub Add/subtract vals in reg. add eax,eab inc/dec Increment/decrement value in reg. inc eax
    [Show full text]
  • The Devil's Advocate Report
    THE DEVIL’S ADVOCATE REPORT August 31, 2011 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. ( SELL) Price: $6.90 Ticker: AMD 52-Week Range: $5.53-$9.58 Dividend: zero Shares Outstanding: 743 million Yield: zero Market Capitalization: $5.1 billion Data As of August 31, 2011 Exclusive Marketers of Horizon Kinetics Research Team The Devil’s Advocate Report Murray Stahl Steven Bregman PCS Research Services Thérèse Byars Derek Devens Peter Doyle 125 Maiden Lane, 6th Floor New York, NY 10038 Michael Gallant Matthew Houk David Leibowitz (212) 233-0100 Eric Sites Fredrik Tjernstrom Steven Tuen www.pcsresearchservices.com Horizon Kinetics LLC (“Horizon Kinetics”) is the parent holding company to several SEC-registered investment advisors including Horizon Asset Management LLC and Kinetics Asset Management LLC. PCS Research Services (“PCS”) is the exclusive marketer and an authorized distributor of this and other research reports created by Horizon Kinetics. This report is based on information available to the public; no representation is made with regard to its accuracy or completeness. This document is neither an offer nor a solicitation to buy or sell securities. All expressions of opinion reflect judgment as of the date set forth above and are subject to change. Horizon Kinetics, PCS and each of their respective employees and affiliates may have positions in securities of companies mentioned herein. All views expressed in this research report accurately reflect the research analysts’ personal views about any and all of the subject matter, securities or issuers. No part of the research analysts’ compensation was, is, or will be, directly or indirectly, related to the specific recommendations or views expressed by the research analysts in the research report.
    [Show full text]