|
Rockbox mail archiveSubject: RE: Re: time to sleep?RE: Re: time to sleep?
From: Scharke, Heiko <Heiko.Scharke_at_systemonic.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 20:11:01 +0200 Hi, can you compile your code examples with the SH gcc and disassemble it again??? Using tkdiff should show the differences ... Heiko -----Original Message----- From: Linus Nielsen Feltzing [mailto:linus_at_haxx.se] Sent: Donnerstag, 22. August 2002 17:42 To: rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se Subject: RE: Re: time to sleep? On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 17:36:05 +0200, Sven Karlsson wrote: > Hi again, > > > and every instruction from the RAM anyway. We have no cache. > > > I perfectly know that. In fact, caches have little to do with this. Yes, they do. If you want fewer memory accesses you will have to use either a cache or sleep between the memory accesses. This is a RISC without a cache. > So the net outcome is shorter code, better register usage, and > fewer memory accesses. All contributing to the power usage. Yes, the power usage will be lower _if_ the CPU can do something good with the time it saves, i.e sleep or loop in a cache. Otherwise it will still spend its time fetching NOP's from the same RAM that we saved us some accesses from. > Anyway, I'll keep my big mouth shut for a while now. Please don't. These types of discussions are almost always fruitful. /Linus -- Linus Nielsen Feltzing, linus_at_haxx.se on 2002-08-22Received on 2002-08-22 Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy |