Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!purdue!haven!ni.umd.edu!uc780.umd.edu!cs450a03
From: cs450a03@uc780.umd.edu
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: RE: Instruction Scheduling
Message-ID: <17APR91.01041249@uc780.umd.edu>
Date: 17 Apr 91 01:04:12 GMT
References: <32097@shamash.cdc.com> <1991Apr8.224717.14402@aero.org> <1991Apr10.131341.26357@b11.ingr.com> <20632@cbmvax.commodore.com> <MEISSNER.91Apr16121331@curley.osf.org> <24130@as0c.sei.cmu.edu>
Sender: usenet@ni.umd.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: The University of Maryland University College
Lines: 12

Curiosity question:

Are there any architectures with setbranch/commit semantics?  (where
setbranch sets up a branch target, and allows for pipeline stuffing,
and commit actually changes flow of control).

Or are pipeline stages generally too expensive for this kind of
duplication?

Inquiring minds want to know...

Raul Rockwell