----------
> From: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@transmeta.com>
> To: submit-linux-dev-kernel@ratatosk.yggdrasil.com
> Subject: Re: MMX performance....
> Date: Friday, February 07, 1997 1:20 PM
>
> Followup to: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970206160255.11244E-100000@waste.org>
> By author: Oliver Xymoron <oxymoron@waste.org>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> > >
> > > Hmm. I haven't had a chance to look at the MMX instruction set, but
> > > I'll be shocked, SHOCKED, if the MMX instruction set doesn't have 64
> > > bit memory transfer instructions. Perhaps a logical alternative
would
> > > be to implement the Pentium memcpy in terms of whichever FPU/MMX mode
> > > was in effect at the time.
> >
> > I'd be shocked as well. Most of the core instruction times are listed
as
> > 1, and from what I can tell, it's just a hack on the already existing
> > functional units in the FPU, taking advantage of the fast multiplier,
etc.
> >
>
> My understanding was that the P55C actually have the FPU and MPU
> completely separate, and that they actually have separate register
> files which are then aliased from a software perspective (so FSAVE can
> be used to save the MMX state.) The MPU is supposed to be dual-issue.
>
> -hpa
> --
> This space intentionally has nothing but text explaining why this
> space has nothing but text explaining that this space would otherwise
> have been left blank, and would otherwise have been left blank.