Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!daveb From: daveb@geac.UUCP (David Collier-Brown) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Is the Intel memory model safe from NO-ONE ?!? Keywords: descriptors, segments, performance Message-ID: <2726@geac.UUCP> Date: 10 May 88 13:14:31 GMT Article-I.D.: geac.2726 Posted: Tue May 10 09:14:31 1988 References: <1806@obiwan.mips.COM> <2904@omepd> <353@cf-cm.UUCP> <22830abd:a11@snark.UUCP> <52404@sun.uucp> <2430@louie.udel.EDU> Reply-To: daveb@geac.UUCP (David Collier-Brown) Organization: The Geac Segment Descriptor Department. Lines: 15 In article <2430@louie.udel.EDU> rminnich@udel.EDU (Ron Minnich) writes: >Before any one goes off the handle about cost, remember the cost >of all those programs that duplicate this stuff in C code. Actually I prefer to deal with bounds-checking at the segment-descriptor level: shrinking a descriptor around my array makes it possible for the hardware (memory managment unit) to do the checks in parallel with the fetch... All I get is a need for an exception handler (once), not a need to write or generate a test-and-branch after every reference. -- David Collier-Brown. {mnetor yunexus utgpu}!geac!daveb Geac Computers International Inc., | Computer Science loses its 350 Steelcase Road,Markham, Ontario, | memory (if not its mind) CANADA, L3R 1B3 (416) 475-0525 x3279 | every 6 months.