51–60 of 110 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It increments rip by one.
I thought I remembered reading somewhere re: the 8086 microcode disassembly that NOP, which is encoded as XCHG AX,AX actually does run the XCHG microcode and uses an internal scratchpad register to do the exchange.
It’s crazy how computers still seem to get perceivably slow every few years, given how many instructions can be executed in 1ms. Shameful, even.. What’s that law called about programmers wasting all the compute on abstraction?
There has been a ton of work to improve throughput, but that's often come at the cost of latency, because a great technique to improve throughput is batching, to avoid the per-task overhead cost.
We've also added many layers of abstraction.
A seminal example is Dan Luu's "computer latency" table (2017) https://danluu.com/input-lag/, which measures the time between a keypress and visible changes on the screen, and wherein an Apple IIe has latency 5x lower than a Lenovo X1 Carbon on Windows.
From some perspective, you could say that the Lenovo on Windows example is an impressive feat of engineering, considering all the subsystems involved (USB, interrupt dispatcher, input layer, windowing system, double-buffering...)
This throughput-over-latency tradeoff can be seen across the entire computer landscape design.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The new windows notepad is a disgrace
The new mspaint fucked, then unfucked, then refucked my decades-old muscle memory of Win+R mspaint Enter Ctrl+E 1 Tab 1 Enter Ctrl+V to open Paint, resize canvas to minimum, then paste from clipboard. When you press Ctrl+E now, the Units control is selected by default, for some completely asinine reason!!!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, that's done by the decoder. It actually does nothing.
I mean....there are several architectures out there which has a nop that is a jump forward. Kind of a tree forest issue imho
It’s crazy how computers still seem to get perceivably slow every few years, given how many instructions can be executed in 1ms. Shameful, even.. What’s that law called about programmers wasting all the compute on abstraction?
It’s crazy how computers still seem to get perceivably slow every few years, given how many instructions can be executed in 1ms. Shameful, even.. What’s that law called about programmers wasting all the compute on abstraction?
Idk man, my computers don't seem to get any slower over time -- no upgrades to any components, either.
Related, and linked in the readme: https://github.com/xoreaxeaxeax/smiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii (using the slow instructions to break SMI)
I wish they would just explain it in normal terms instead of this nasty LLM "engaging blog post" style
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, that's done by the decoder. It actually does nothing.
The decoder is an implementation detail that is a subcomponent of NOP; GP was right, and your correction isn't.
Related, and linked in the readme: https://github.com/xoreaxeaxeax/smiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii (using the slow instructions to break SMI)
I wish they would just explain it in normal terms instead of this nasty LLM "engaging blog post" style