On 9/3/07, Petter Urkedal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think we can afford to use 8 bits for encoding registers. That leaves > us 8 bits of the instruction word for other uses, which is sufficient in > the current version. Further, we don't need to split evenly between > register kinds, so maybe something like > > q0..q31 previous frame registers r0..r31 > r0..r63 current frame registers > g0..g127 global registers > s0..s31 IO-registers > > would be more useful. We should keep in mind, though, that we no longer > have computed addresses, so we can't e.g. do table lookups. That is, > unless we have a spare memory block which we connect to two of the > IO-registers. (We have not quite walked in circles.)
I think these are interesting ideas, but I just don't think we need this complexity for something whose entire program file is only 512 words. If we decide later to develop a completely free computer with our own CPU design, we're going to have to address these things, along with virtual memory. -- Timothy Normand Miller http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~millerti Open Graphics Project _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
