By: Mark Roulo (nothanks.delete@this.xxx.com), July 17, 2015 8:19 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Michael S (already5chosen.delete@this.yahoo.com) on July 17, 2015 4:51 am wrote:
> Jouni Osmala (josmala.delete@this.cc.hut.fi) on July 17, 2015 1:18 am wrote:
> >
> >
> > I believe haswell made the best possible addition to speed up bounds checking. Increasing
> > the branch unit from one to two. Having already compare and branch as fused operation
> > means that at execution stage it doesn't take more than one additional operation.
> >
>
> Generally, on that regard, unlike many others I am from you school, i.e. the argument that hardware to speed
> up bound checks should better be spent to speed up not only bound checks looks to me as very valid.
>
> BUT
>
> Without deep thinking I can see at least two good reasons
> for specialized hardware/ISA support for bound checking.
We are getting bounds checkin H/W with Skylake.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_MPX
I have no idea about the performance (one hopes it is faster than
software solutions ...)
> Jouni Osmala (josmala.delete@this.cc.hut.fi) on July 17, 2015 1:18 am wrote:
> >
> >
> > I believe haswell made the best possible addition to speed up bounds checking. Increasing
> > the branch unit from one to two. Having already compare and branch as fused operation
> > means that at execution stage it doesn't take more than one additional operation.
> >
>
> Generally, on that regard, unlike many others I am from you school, i.e. the argument that hardware to speed
> up bound checks should better be spent to speed up not only bound checks looks to me as very valid.
>
> BUT
>
> Without deep thinking I can see at least two good reasons
> for specialized hardware/ISA support for bound checking.
We are getting bounds checkin H/W with Skylake.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_MPX
I have no idea about the performance (one hopes it is faster than
software solutions ...)