You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The instruction table's header names the column listing the execution time for each instruction "clock cycles". This is an ambiguous term, as it could mean M or T cycles. While there is a description at the top, the term remains confusing, particularly for someone looking at the documentation quickly; it is also at odds with most community usage, where "cycles" means M-cycles.
Would it be better to label the column "T-states" explicitly instead? Another option would be to quarter the values, but I assume this wasn't done for some reason I'm unaware of.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'd vote for "clocks", since it seems rather well understood that "clocks" are 4 MiHz, but "cycles" are 1 MiHz. Of course, restating both equivalences is a must.
The instruction table's header names the column listing the execution time for each instruction "clock cycles". This is an ambiguous term, as it could mean M or T cycles. While there is a description at the top, the term remains confusing, particularly for someone looking at the documentation quickly; it is also at odds with most community usage, where "cycles" means M-cycles.
Would it be better to label the column "T-states" explicitly instead? Another option would be to quarter the values, but I assume this wasn't done for some reason I'm unaware of.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: