Ha!! We only *WISH* we were based on a 30-year old machine design! ;-) Reminds me of a joke: last night I was out with ... oh, let's not go there. Is it really only Monday?
Mike Walter "Alan Altmark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> 12/04/2006 04:43 PM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: CMSCALL return code On Monday, 12/04/2006 at 02:33 PST, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Pipelining a machine and adding caches does throw a monkey wrench into > the discussion. Add interrupts and you really have a mess. That is one > reason why the performance guys like to preface every sentence with > "YMMV" or "It depends" :-) ...and is why, unless we're in a performance-sensitive area of code, we avoid spending time worrying about the speed of a particular instruction (laden or unladen). You get into endless arguments that are religious in nature and based on 30-year-old machine designs. :-) Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.
