Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 20:58:08 GMT
From: John Bradford <john@grabjohn.com>
Message-Id: <200403222058.i2MKw8vb000340@81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk>
To: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>,
       "Tigran Aivazian" <tigran@veritas.com>,
       "Timothy Miller" <miller@techsource.com>,
       "Justin Piszcz" <jpiszcz@hotmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <WorldClient-F200403221114.AA14370017@webmaster.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0403191721110.3892-100000@einstein.homenet>
 <405F0B8D.8040408@techsource.com>
 <Pine.GSO.4.58.0403220736480.8694@south.veritas.com>
 <WorldClient-F200403221114.AA14370017@webmaster.com>
Subject: Re: Linux Kernel Microcode Question
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 907
Lines: 21

> > Do you understand now?
> 
> You are using the word "instruction" to mean something different than 
> what I am using it to mean. I am using "instruction" to mean "the 
> smallest cohesive unit of operation". I do NOT mean "instruction" as 
> in "an operation coded by the programmer".
> 
> I am talking about the case where an "operation" performed in buggy 
> hardware is replaced by an "operation" performed in fixed microcode.

Using the word "operation" in this sense actually adds to the
confusion, because the term 'opcode' is, (or was), in common use for
"an operation coded by the programmer", which is not what you mean by
"operation" at all.

John.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/