Difference between ARM and any other General Purpose Processor
Sikandar
Pls tell me the diff b/w ARM processor and anyother General Purpose
Processor.
Thanks,
Sikandar.
Pete Fenelon
> Hi All,
>
> Pls tell me the diff b/w ARM processor and anyother General Purpose
> Processor.
Take your homework to your professor.
pete
--
pe...@fenelon.com "how many clever men have called the sun a fool?"
Ulf Samuelsson
news:1174628070.0...@e1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Hi All,
>
> Pls tell me the diff b/w ARM processor and anyother General Purpose
> Processor.
>
An ARM processor uses an Instruction Set Architecture
developed by ARM Ltd, and other processors don't :-)
--
Best Regards,
Ulf Samuelsson
This is intended to be my personal opinion which may,
or may not be shared by my employer Atmel Nordic AB
Stan
"Ulf Samuelsson" <u...@a-t-m-e-l.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:eu00b1$n2a$1...@aioe.org...
> "Sikandar" <sikan...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
> news:1174628070.0...@e1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Pls tell me the diff b/w ARM processor and anyother General Purpose
> > Processor.
> >
>
> An ARM processor uses an Instruction Set Architecture
> developed by ARM Ltd, and other processors don't :-)
>
> --
Why ARM procesor are used by many people ?
--
-Stan
bork...@gmail.com
> "Ulf Samuelsson" <u...@a-t-m-e-l.com> a écrit dans le message denews:eu00b1$n2a$1...@aioe.org...
>
> >news:1174628070.0...@e1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> > > Hi All,
>
> > > Pls tell me the diff b/w ARM processor and anyother General Purpose
> > > Processor.
>
> > An ARM processor uses an Instruction Set Architecture
> > developed by ARM Ltd, and other processors don't :-)
>
> > --
>
> Why ARM procesor are used by many people ?
There is no ARM processor. There is a ARM processor core, that can be
used to build an ARM based processor. And yes, there are a lot of ARM
based processors, just like there are a lot of MIPS-based processors.
I don't know which is used more often, but the processor you choose
depends on the features you need on a processor, the processing power
and the budget.
Kind regards,
Johan Borkhuis
CBFalconer
> "Ulf Samuelsson" <u...@a-t-m-e-l.com> a écrit:
>>> Purpose Processor.
>>
>> An ARM processor uses an Instruction Set Architecture
>> developed by ARM Ltd, and other processors don't :-)
>
It's a plot by the Powers That Be.
--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
wertyWasHere
"Sikandar" <sikan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1174628070.0...@e1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
The ARM processor is a 5 digit processor, most others are 8, 16, 32 or 64
bit.
Ulf Samuelsson
news:eu03rn$6u8$1...@s1.news.oleane.net...
ARM cores lived a pretty insignificant life until Apple decided
to design the Newton PDA.
The ARM chip exisited, and did the job so Apple Engineers selected it.
Every ASIC vendor wanted to be in this business, and they were
aware of the requirement of binary compatibility from their experience
from the PC market, so a lot of the ASIC vendors licensed the ARM
core. Intel and Motorola refused to license their cores for ASIC use.
When Apple canned the Newton the ASIC vendors were sitting
with a core, which started to become useful in different ASIC projects.
Then some vendors started to promote ARM7 as general purpose
microcontrollers, (Atmel was one of the first).
DEC, then Intel started to promote the StrongARM followed by XScale.
The ARM9 based AT91RM9200, introduced is very good for the embedded
Linux market, and the AT91SAM926x family seems to even more successful.
When NXP released their flash based ARM7, quickly followed
by the Atmel SAM7 (rest of competition hardly counts)
people began to see the possibility to use same toolset with many vendors.
People believe that they will be able to live with ARM for a long time.
At the same time, the makers of ASSPs and especially mobile phones
and PDAs have converged on ARM and this has made it very attractive
for third party vendors.
When potential customers see the variety of support for ARM, then
it is going to be a great motivator to select it.
ARM cores are not really *excellent* cores, MIPS cores are generally
faster, but good enough for many applications
MIPS cores have other problems. IIRC You have to use a compiler
since there are strange things in the compiler which would confuse
an ordinary assembler programmer.
Paul Gotch
> Why ARM procesor are used by many people ?
Historical accident mostly. Things really took off as ARM had the right
product (the ARM7TDMI) in the right place (mobile phones) at the right time
(circa 1995).
The ARM7TDMI gave the developers a full 32 bit processor which they could
also use with the 16 bit THUMB instruction set.
While it might not seem important now the code size benefits of THUMB meant
that the vendors could minimise the the amount of flash in their phone and
when you are making millions of units being able to halve the amount of flash
you need makes a very big difference to your bottom line.
-p
--
"Unix is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are."
- Anonymous
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Frank Miles
Just to make sure... that's only in Thumb mode, right?
...had to ask...
-f
--
Robert Kaiser
"Ulf Samuelsson" <u...@a-t-m-e-l.com> writes:
> MIPS cores have other problems. IIRC You have to use a compiler
> since there are strange things in the compiler which would confuse
> an ordinary assembler programmer.
You are probably referring to instructions being synthesized
by the assembler (not the compiler), e.g. MIPS doesn't have
an instruction to load a 32-bit constant, nevertheless the
assembler understands e.g. "la <32-bit-value>" and generates
an appropriate sequence of instructions. Also, the AT register
("assembler temporary") can be used as scratchpad register
by the assembler at any time, so an assembly programmer should
not use it. However, all these features can be disabled
by assembly pragmas.
So, you *can* program MIPS in assembly if you really need to.
Rob
--
Robert Kaiser email: rkaiser AT sysgo DOT com
SYSGO AG http://www.elinos.com
Klein-Winternheim / Germany http://www.sysgo.com
David Kelly
But don't forget they usually come in complementary pairs and used in
parallel.
Alt Beer
"Stan" <no...@none.invalid> wrote in message
news:eu03rn$6u8$1...@s1.news.oleane.net...
Many arms make light work
David Brown
> In article <eu1313$bbq$1...@aioe.org>,
> "Ulf Samuelsson" <u...@a-t-m-e-l.com> writes:
>> MIPS cores have other problems. IIRC You have to use a compiler
>> since there are strange things in the compiler which would confuse
>> an ordinary assembler programmer.
>
> You are probably referring to instructions being synthesized
> by the assembler (not the compiler), e.g. MIPS doesn't have
> an instruction to load a 32-bit constant, nevertheless the
> assembler understands e.g. "la <32-bit-value>" and generates
> an appropriate sequence of instructions. Also, the AT register
> ("assembler temporary") can be used as scratchpad register
> by the assembler at any time, so an assembly programmer should
> not use it. However, all these features can be disabled
> by assembly pragmas.
>
That is not specific to MIPS - any RISC processor that does not have
variable length instructions will be unable to load full-width constants
directly.
My guess is that he is referring to delay slots (a useful idea, which
can greatly reduce the wasted cycles for pipeline flushes on branches).
On the MIPS, branch and jump instructions do not act immediately -
they work more as sort of "do the next two instructions, *then* branch"
instructions. Thus in a function return, you'll get a "return"
instruction followed by the last two instructions of the function. This
can get very confusing if you are not used to it, especially if you want
other conditional instructions during the delays. Additionally, the
number of delay slots varies slightly in different circumstances, and
between different MIPS cores. I believe the assembler can give you some
help, but it's easier to let the compiler get it right!