Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| Date | 2011-07-02 09:29 +0200 |
|---|---|
| From | Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> |
| Newsgroups | comp.arch |
| Subject | Re: Do x86 or arm processors have "interrupt overload protection" or maybe windows ? |
| References | <5932822b-f1cb-4197-9113-6f0baf7a425b@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com> <4e0e2991.662254@news.aioe.org> |
| Message-ID | <gvt2e8-kh4.ln1@ntp6.tmsw.no> (permalink) |
John Savard wrote: > Also, at least an x86 has a *stack*, so it's luckier than a 360 in the > event of an interrupt. Not anymore: Current x64 cpus with SSE++ can have a K or more of architecture-visible processor task state. Terje -- - <Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no> "almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"
Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Do x86 or arm processors have "interrupt overload protection" or maybe windows ? MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2011-07-01 07:45 -0700
Re: Do x86 or arm processors have "interrupt overload protection" or maybe windows ? vandys@vsta.org - 2011-07-01 17:03 +0000
Re: Do x86 or arm processors have "interrupt overload protection" or maybe windows ? jsavard@excxn.aNOSPAMb.cdn.invalid (John Savard) - 2011-07-01 20:10 +0000
Re: Do x86 or arm processors have "interrupt overload protection" or maybe windows ? Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-07-02 09:29 +0200
Re: Do x86 or arm processors have "interrupt overload protection" or maybe windows ? Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2011-07-02 13:37 +0000
Re: Do x86 or arm processors have "interrupt overload protection" or maybe windows ? "Skybuck Flying" <Windows7IsOK@DreamPC2006.com> - 2011-07-03 09:52 +0200
Re: Do x86 or arm processors have "interrupt overload protection" or maybe windows ? "Skybuck Flying" <Windows7IsOK@DreamPC2006.com> - 2011-07-03 09:58 +0200
csiph-web