Reply to post: Re: "I did not know that ARM actually prohibited adding instructions"

Talk about a calculated RISC: If you think you can do a better job than Arm at designing CPUs, now's your chance

doublelayer Silver badge

Re: "I did not know that ARM actually prohibited adding instructions"

It really depends what you're doing. In many of the cases mentioned in the article, the unknown instructions are probably very manufacturer-specific, and therefore little care needs to be taken because the code will only run on chips made by that manufacturer. But there is code to check CPU IDs and change what instructions are run. Perhaps the simplest example of that is CPUs with an AES acceleration capacity. It's frequent to have a check performed at the beginning of the code to determine if the processor executing the code has acceleration instructions for AES. If it does, a branch using those instructions runs. If it doesn't, a branch that has the functionality implemented in software and compiled into traditional instructions is run instead. It's not checked immediately before running the encryption; instead it's checked at the beginning and the result determines what code is run for minimal overhead. The same could be a factor depending on what manufacturers choose to do with the ability to create new instructions.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019