Article: AMD's Mobile Strategy
By: none (none.delete@this.none.com), December 17, 2011 11:15 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra@ntlworld.com) on 12/17/11 wrote:
---------------------------
[...]
>ARM and Thumb-2 are virtually identical - you can reassemble ARM code into Thumb-2.
>Essentially Thumb-2 is a superset of ARM with a wider range of immediates, addressing modes and instructions.
>
>Thumb-2 has removed a few complex shifts of course, but that doesn't make it less
>complex - they were removed as they were hardly ever used. Overall you need far
>fewer Thumb-2 instructions than ARM, ie. Thumb-2 instructions do more work than
>ARM instructions and are thus more complex.
According to my experience this is completely false. In
what context did you get such a result (compiler,
benchmark)? Oh and please count IT as one instruction :-)
Or perhaps you meant the dynamic size of executed
instructions is less which I can believe?
---------------------------
[...]
>ARM and Thumb-2 are virtually identical - you can reassemble ARM code into Thumb-2.
>Essentially Thumb-2 is a superset of ARM with a wider range of immediates, addressing modes and instructions.
>
>Thumb-2 has removed a few complex shifts of course, but that doesn't make it less
>complex - they were removed as they were hardly ever used. Overall you need far
>fewer Thumb-2 instructions than ARM, ie. Thumb-2 instructions do more work than
>ARM instructions and are thus more complex.
According to my experience this is completely false. In
what context did you get such a result (compiler,
benchmark)? Oh and please count IT as one instruction :-)
Or perhaps you meant the dynamic size of executed
instructions is less which I can believe?
