By: someone (someone.delete@this.somewhere.com), November 17, 2010 11:51 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Matt Waldhauer (M.Waldhauer@gmx.de) on 11/17/10 wrote:
---------------------------
>Thanks for your nice speculative article.
>
>What do you think about the idea that Poulson might employ reliable computing by
>issueing the same instructions twice to different execution units?
>
>- Matt
Poulson seems to offer up the possibility of doing a kind
of dual core lock step execution within a single core.
If 1) you restrict per thread instruction issue width to two
bundles, and 2) there is sufficient symmetry in execution
resources, one couldd execute a single program thread
duplicated as two hardware threads running in lock step
on one core. It wouldn't take much extra logic to cross-
check execution results in real time.
---------------------------
>Thanks for your nice speculative article.
>
>What do you think about the idea that Poulson might employ reliable computing by
>issueing the same instructions twice to different execution units?
>
>- Matt
Poulson seems to offer up the possibility of doing a kind
of dual core lock step execution within a single core.
If 1) you restrict per thread instruction issue width to two
bundles, and 2) there is sufficient symmetry in execution
resources, one couldd execute a single program thread
duplicated as two hardware threads running in lock step
on one core. It wouldn't take much extra logic to cross-
check execution results in real time.
