Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.forth > #16625

Re: RTX2000 optimization

From rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.forth
Subject Re: RTX2000 optimization
Date 2012-10-23 17:19 -0400
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <k671kb$1uc$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <e1479cfa-a969-40ab-b20c-096d82601657@googlegroups.com> <3b14c2ce-6e19-4df7-abc2-cf169dcf9665@googlegroups.com> <07562d07-693e-48ec-b996-610c4eba1cc9@k21g2000vbj.googlegroups.com> <k64bj1$m4n$1@dont-email.me> <k64t1j$nlq$1@speranza.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw


On 10/22/2012 9:52 PM, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> "rickman"<gnuarm@gmail.com>  wrote in message
> news:k64bj1$m4n$1@dont-email.me...
>> On 10/22/2012 3:10 PM, Mark Wills wrote:
>>> On Oct 22, 5:56 pm, visualfo...@rocketmail.com wrote:
>
>>>> Despite allowing several Forth commands inside one RTX2000 16 bit
>>>> word a great advantage is the ability to set a special Return from
>>>> Subroutine bit - that is a real speed accelerator - so a whole
>>>> executable program may need only one RTX2000 16 bit word!
>>>> Imagine what additional possibilities you can have with 32 bit words!
>>>
>>> Hmmm... I'm not following you. What is the function/significance of
>>> this special bit? Where is it set? In the call instruction or the
>>> return instruction?
>>
>> <this post turned out to be a bit longer than I expected...>
>>
>
> I'm versed in (old) microprocessor design.  So, that's easily taken care of:
> [SNIP]
>
>> The only issue with such combining of instructions is the instruction
>> encoding.  I encoded to minimize the amount of program space needed
>> which resulted in a minimum width instruction optimized per Koopman's
>> data for instruction frequency.  I looked at separating the opcodes for
>> each unit in essence making the MISC equivalent of a VLIW processor, if
>> you can have such a thing... lol  I couldn't quite squeeze the
>> instruction into a 9 bit word which is a memory width commonly available
>> in FPGAs. [...]
>
> Forth's built using "primitives" generally need 30 to 40 or so, i.e.,
> 5-bits.  Why do you need 9-bits (512)?  I'd guess that you're encoding
> things other than just the instruction, e.g., control-bits, offsets, modes,
> etc.

I was constrained by the memories available in FPGAs.  Many allow 
somewhat flexible word widths of 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 16 and 18 bits, some 
even 32 and 36 bits.  Multiplexing multiple instructions in one word has 
a downside in that it requires extra levels of logic in the instruction 
decode path which affects *all* instructions.  I wanted to avoid that.

So I started with a 4 bit instruction and found that rather limiting, 
mainly in the impact on performance since most code as around twice as 
long as it could be with larger instructions.  Literals (both data and 
address) were especially problematic.  Looking at Koopman's data it was 
clear that anything which could optimize the address fields of calls and 
other instructions, including immediate data would be a boon.

So I tried 8 bit words and used a variable bit with instruction with the 
remaining bits as immediate data.  This was combined with a data 
extension scheme similar to that used by the Transputer.  They used 4 
bit instructions with 4 bits of immediate data which would be shifted 
into larger words.  Since this would be the most commonly used 
instruction I gave it one bit with 7 bit immediate data.  The first 
invocation of a literal instruction pushes the top of return stack with 
the 7 bit data, sign extended.  Each subsequent invocation of the 
literal instruction shifts 7 more bits into the top of return stack. 
Calls and Jumps have a four field which is combined with the top of 
return stack if a literal has been pushed, or just sign extended if not.

There remains some 16 opcodes for the various instructions for 
manipulating data.  The 8 bit machine was used in one design.

I considered a 9 bit version to fully utilize the block RAM in most 
FPGAs.  The immediate data fields were extended by one bit which I think 
was significant for jumps and calls, 5 bits vs. 4).  In the case of 
general opcodes the extra bit could be used to provide 32 instructions 
rather than 16, but I didn't feel this gave much benefit and complicated 
the instruction decode which was already more complex than I preferred. 
  Another alternative was to use the extra bit to flag a combined Return 
instruction.  I found it could only be used with about half the opcodes 
I was using because of conflicts.


> Koopman's and Ertl's instruction frequency data is basically the same.
> Using their data is a good choice though.

It is a LOT better than no data at all which is what I have otherwise.


> (This is also posted earlier in the thread:)
> The question for both you (and Brad) is if you create new, faster, more
> powerful, multiple operation instructions, how do you ensure they are used?
> Without an optimizer, it's likely the instruction will have a low
> instruction frequency.  I.e., a person is unlikely to use it.  In which
> case, there is no point in using or implementing it.

Who is this "person"?  My design was for me and if I generated enough 
code to analyze statistically, I would pick the instructions to combine 
from analyzing my code.  It's not like I am selling this design for 
others to use... not that I wouldn't mind sharing, but you have to read 
my mind for much of the details.  One person asked and I gave him my 
block diagram with labeled control points and my opcode cheat sheet.  He 
couldn't make heads or tails out of it... lol


>> The obvious one, return as a separate bit, in parallel with everything,
>> can only be used with about half the instructions in my CPU design.  The
>> return stack is used in a lot of them.  But if the bit is free...
>
> Years ago, there was a processor that used a few bits, like two, for
> conditional execution of each instruction.  I don't recall what it was, or
> if it was a Forth processor.  It might've been a bit-slice design...

I've heard of that as well as other "unique" features.  An ancient 
Univac machine had a bit in the address field that flagged indirect. 
The address fetched had the same bit... they had to add a indirect 
counter to get out of the infinite loops that could happen.


>> Info that would be VERY useful to me is frequency of use of instructions
>> in combination.  This could be pulled from existing code by measuring
>> how often instructions are found adjacent to each other.  This may not
>> be a perfect measure, but it would be a great start.  Can anyone
>> generate a metric on this similar to Koopman's data on instruction use?
>
> Anton Ertl also has instruction frequency data.  I don't recall if he showed
> combinations or not.  I know he or someone created the concept of "super
> operators" for Forth, which I think is what you're asking about.  If he
> doesn't respond, I'll attempt to locate for you what I previously found.

That would be greatly interesting.  I'm surprised I didn't notice this 
before.  I wish there was some market for a machine like this, but then 
others would have done this before me.  I know Bernd would have been all 
over this years ago if the market existed as well as others.

It seems that if the CPU isn't pipelined and blazing fast, it isn't 
interesting to most FPGA users.  They prefer very high performance CPUs 
that access MBs of external memory and use 1000's of LUTs.  My design 
has an extensible word size, but will likely never have a C compiler for 
it.

That reminds me of the ZPU.  It is a stack machine designed to run C. 
It was also designed to be as tiny as possible in the minimal 
configuration with other versions running faster but using more 
resources.  The ported the gcc tools for it.  I think the minimal 
version is slightly smaller than my design, but very slow, maybe 10x... 
or would that be 10/?

Rick

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-10-22 08:53 -0700
  Re: RTX2000 optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-22 11:21 -0500
  Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-22 09:56 -0700
    Re: RTX2000 optimization Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-22 12:10 -0700
      Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-22 12:55 -0700
      Re: RTX2000 optimization Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-10-22 22:02 +0200
      Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-22 16:50 -0400
        Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-22 21:52 -0400
          Re: RTX2000 optimization Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-10-22 22:03 -0700
            Re: RTX2000 optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-23 03:19 -0500
              Re: RTX2000 optimization vandys@vsta.org - 2012-10-23 17:54 +0000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-10-24 08:16 -0700
          Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-23 17:19 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-24 06:56 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-24 12:26 +0000
              Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 15:25 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-25 00:30 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-24 22:10 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 16:43 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-26 17:55 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 19:44 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-27 02:17 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 23:01 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-27 22:18 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 19:19 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-28 04:21 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 14:36 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-29 19:06 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-10-30 02:07 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-30 09:36 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-10-30 08:09 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-30 19:14 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-30 18:50 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 07:37 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-31 15:27 +0000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 08:59 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-10-31 11:18 -0500
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 13:49 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 13:43 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 12:03 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Mark Wills <forthfreak@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 09:05 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 09:06 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 09:25 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] danw8804@gmail.com - 2012-10-31 09:38 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:30 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:27 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 12:01 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 16:31 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-31 20:33 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 14:05 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-01 11:23 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 14:31 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-02 22:11 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 12:50 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-03 10:42 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 13:59 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-03 12:10 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 15:42 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-03 15:56 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 20:53 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-11-04 11:10 +0000
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-04 22:58 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-05 15:29 +0100
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-05 14:40 +0000
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-05 11:36 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-05 09:02 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-05 15:22 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-05 12:56 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-06 12:22 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-06 09:29 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-06 12:53 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-06 10:00 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-06 08:04 -1000
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-06 13:37 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-05 21:06 +0100
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-05 15:29 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-06 16:28 +0100
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-06 12:50 -0500
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-07 20:29 -0800
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-11-04 10:40 +0000
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-01 21:26 +0100
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-01 13:44 -0700
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-02 04:03 -0400
                Re: Xula-200 or Raspberry-Pi a better buy?, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] David Schultz <abuse@127.0.0.1> - 2012-11-04 17:17 -0600
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 12:48 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-11-02 10:25 -1000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-02 19:54 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-03 17:47 +0100
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-03 14:05 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-11-05 11:55 +0000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-11-03 19:20 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2012-11-04 16:08 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2012-11-04 17:14 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-11-04 18:40 +0100
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-11-04 09:36 -0600
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Andy Valencia <vandys@vsta.org> - 2012-11-04 23:49 +0000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 12:11 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 20:08 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 10:59 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 12:12 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 12:14 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 10:51 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-11-02 11:28 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-11-01 14:58 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-28 14:45 +0100
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 15:04 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-28 21:09 +0100
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 16:59 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2012-10-28 07:59 +0000
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 15:06 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 16:35 -0400
        Re: RTX2000 optimization anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-10-23 12:44 +0000
          Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-23 17:32 -0400
  Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-10-22 13:54 -0700
    Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-22 14:14 -0700
      Re: RTX2000 optimization daveyrotten <danw8804@gmail.com> - 2012-10-22 14:26 -0700
        Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-22 16:00 -0700
  Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-22 21:51 -0400
    Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-23 17:36 -0400
      Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-24 08:47 -0400
        Re: RTX2000 optimization Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-24 06:36 -0700
          Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 15:33 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-25 04:54 -0700
              Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 17:35 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-25 15:27 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 19:10 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-25 18:34 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 19:03 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-26 19:56 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-26 18:34 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-26 22:27 +0200
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 19:27 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 19:17 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-26 19:44 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-26 19:59 -0400
          Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-25 00:42 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-25 00:55 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-10-25 04:49 -0700
          addressable stack, was [Re: RTX2000 optimization] "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-11-05 14:04 -0500
        Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 15:44 -0400
          Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-25 00:50 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 18:58 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-25 16:07 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 19:20 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-26 20:57 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-27 15:43 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-28 05:01 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-28 15:23 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-29 19:32 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-30 19:00 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnotz.cnm> - 2012-10-31 01:23 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-31 14:56 -0400
  Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-22 19:44 -0700
    Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-23 17:47 -0400
      Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-23 16:00 -0700
        Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-23 21:07 -0400
          Re: RTX2000 optimization visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-10-23 18:44 -0700
            Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 16:03 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-24 13:15 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 16:25 -0400
              Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-26 03:15 +0200
      Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 09:55 -0700
        Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-24 10:04 -0700
          Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 12:00 -0700
            Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-24 23:24 -0700
              Re: RTX2000 optimization Brad Eckert <hwfwguy@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 09:26 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-25 10:39 -0700
                Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-25 19:35 -0400
                Re: RTX2000 optimization Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-10-26 18:26 +0200
          Re: RTX2000 optimization rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-10-24 16:10 -0400
            Re: RTX2000 optimization Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-10-24 13:21 -0700
  Re: RTX2000 optimization stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-10-23 10:52 +0000

csiph-web