News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Analyzing the complexity of various RISC/CISC architectures by zozbot234 on Saturday December 31, 2022 @05:59PM (#34201630)
Yes but RISC-V is very risc-y by the criteria Mashey proposes here. The one thing that arguably doesn't completely fit is the multiple insn sizes, and even then real-world RISC-V implementations have only two, at 2 or 4 bytes. That's still very low compared to historical CISC. And I think the atomic instructions do RMW to memory, but they carefully avoid complicated address modes; they even dispense with register+immediate offset.
Re:Analyzing the complexity of various RISC/CISC architectures by 33985868 on Saturday December 31, 2022 @06:56PM (#34202036)
MIPS did it too with the MIPS16 extension (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIPS_architecture#Application-...)

Makes sense as a hardware designer to be able to pick a power- and space-efficient chip.

Mashey also had thoughts about that: https://yarchive.net/comp/mips16.html

Likewise for atomic operations: https://yarchive.net/comp/ll_sc.html

Re:Analyzing the complexity of various RISC/CISC architectures by Tuna-Fish on Saturday December 31, 2022 @09:09PM (#34202861)
> The one thing that arguably doesn't completely fit is the multiple insn sizes, and even then real-world RISC-V implementations have only two, at 2 or 4 bytes.

They will have a third very soon. The encoding space for 4-byte instructions is almost spent.