[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [f-cpu] use of 1r1w regfile for our 3r2w regfile
Le Vendredi 13 Juin 2003 18:02, Michael Riepe a écrit :
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 05:11:54PM +0200, nico@seul.org wrote:
> > To speed up regfile look up, we could use 4 1r1w regfile which introduice
> > 4r4w port . In case of colliding, one clock cycle is lost.
>
> Or two, in case of a 2r2w or 3r1w instruction. With <m> operands and <n>
> results, there may be <m>+<n>-2 collisions -- no matter how many separate
> banks there are. It's just less likely that a collision occurs with four
> banks instead of two or three, but I doubt that it's worth the effort.
>
> For target technologies that work on the transistor level, we should
> design our own multi-ported SRAM if nothing appropriate is available.
>
> In any other case, we'll have to use what's available. Worst case is
> that we have to resort to ordinary latches with some stuff around them
> (2:1 muxes at the input, 64:1 muxes at the outputs).
>
> On the other hand, the meaning of "worst case" clearly depends on ones
> point of view. You can't build a 5-port (3r2w) RAM from 2-port (1r1w)
> RAMs unless you put each register into its own bank (and then you
> could also have used latches which are probably smaller and faster).
> Therefore, you would have to adapt not only the scheduler but also
> the compiler to the kind of register set used (in particular, to the
> number of banks and the `interleaving factor', that is, the placement
> of individual registers). This is what I consider the "worst case".
But is that good or not ? 4x 1r1w regifile will be ~30% faster than a true
3r2w.
nicO
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@seul.org with
unsubscribe f-cpu in the body. http://f-cpu.seul.org/