From 24e07c2ad54bee443b0e97424157d04dac6ad0a0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 18:24:44 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] partial update --- simple_v_extension.mdwn | 12 +++++++++++- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/simple_v_extension.mdwn b/simple_v_extension.mdwn index 2338b6caf..96aec47ea 100644 --- a/simple_v_extension.mdwn +++ b/simple_v_extension.mdwn @@ -145,6 +145,16 @@ architecture. Constructing a SIMD/Simple-Vector proposal based around even only these four (five?) requirements would therefore seem to be a logical thing to do. +# Instruction Format + +**TODO** *basically borrow from both P and V, which should be quite simple +to do, with the exception of Tag/no-tag, which needs a bit more +thought. V's Section 17.19 of Draft V2.3 spec is reminiscent of B's BGS +gather-scatterer, and, if implemented, could actually be a really useful +way to span 8-bit up to 64-bit groups of data, where BGS as it stands +and described by Clifford does **bits** of up to 16 width. Lots to +look at and investigate!* + # References * SIMD considered harmful @@ -153,4 +163,4 @@ Constructing a SIMD/Simple-Vector proposal based around even only these four "implicit program-counter" * Re-continuing P-Extension proposal * First Draft P-SIMD (DSP) proposal - +* B-Extension discussion -- 2.30.2