Re:Custom Processing Unit: Hook, patch, and trace microcode ...
by actionfromafar on Friday August 12, 2022 @10:51AM
(#32439516)
It makes sense what you say, but I still have doubts. Are you saying that not all x86 instructions are implemented in microcode? And wouldn't shader language be a perfect target for custom microcode, etc.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Custom Processing Unit: Hook, patch, and trace microcode ...
by cesarb on Friday August 12, 2022 @12:22PM
(#32440753)
> Are you saying that not all x86 instructions are implemented in microcode?
If you look at discussions about the instruction decoder of Intel processors, you often see it mentioned that they have something like three "simple" decoders and one "complex" decoder. The main difference is that the "complex" decoder is the only one which can decode instructions implemented in microcode (dispatching micro-operations from the microcode ROM), while the "simple" decoders can only output micro-operations directly (using something similar to hard-wired pattern matching on the instruction). So yes, many x86 instructions are not implemented in microcode.
Re:Custom Processing Unit: Hook, patch, and trace microcode ...
by mhh__ on Friday August 12, 2022 @01:39PM
(#32441713)
The term microcode has become muddled in that you have microcode for implementing highly complex instructions and "microcode" as-in an internal target that X86 instructions are translated into.