I agree that many RISC implementations are a little too barebones, but stuff like x86 and x86_64 are far too fat. They're so fat that the sheer number of instructions is becoming a bottleneck and CPU designers have moved to emulating it on top of specialized RISC processors to get anything resembling good performance.
If you're interested in processors doing useful things, take a look at RISC-V's Standard Extension for Vector Operations. It takes some cues from the Cray in hopes of avoiding other ISAs' neverending vector extensions.
Most of those 60 million lines are drivers. Cut out the drivers you aren't using and even on a fat kernel like Linux there's a very impressive reduction in size.
MULTIPLE VULNERABILITIES IN THE RUST PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE
Austin Phillips
Cameron Campbell
Firstly, in what universe has a Lisp machine ever come close to modern *nix in usability?
Secondly, as said, much of the codebase is drivers. You kinda need those if you want hardware compatibility.
John White
What's the point of rust again? Is it a containment language for all the freaks and trannies and homos?
Dylan Parker
That doesn't even resemble what's actually going on.
The bottleneck on your modern amd64 chip is two-fold.
1. since it's an OOO machine, with a ROB that tracks dependencies and executes instructions in dependency order, it's IPC limited by the amount of dependencies and how granular said ROB can be made. 8086 and 80386 compatibility comes with an absolutely immense amount of global state and extremely strong ordering. At some (very early) point it stops making sense to just increase the size of the register file. The dirty secret of OOO execution is how very in-order it really is.
2. instruction decoding is obscenely complex, so every instruction decoder ends up being a deep variable length pipeline of nightmares. The most common instructions have to be decoded in fewer stages than less common ones, but you also need to take into account what you can issue more of concurrently. It's a mess, and it's once again because it has to be compatible with half a century of development by accretion. You stand no chance of reusing instruction decoders across reworks of anything, because it's all so intensely interdependent that everything ends up being a ground-up rewrite.
Add to that that most advancements in single-core performance is still down to changing restrictions of fab processes...
What you (wrongly) call an internal RISC machine is nothing of the sort. It's extremely CISC on the inside as well. Just because it kinda-sorta re-encodes instruction to a wide set of internal signals doesn't mean it in any way resembles anything you could conceivably call RISC. The way they actually become fast is by being about as non-RISC and doing as much speculative execution as possible.
In fact, conventional VLIW processors resemble RISC much more internally that amd64 machines do, and they still look nothing like a RISC machine and more like DSPs.
The actual amount of instructions is in no way a problem. Just look at other VLIW machines. They will usually have humongous list of instructions. Some of them very CISC and difficult to execute. The difference is that they're properly structured to require as little decoding as possible so you can issue 10s of them in a single cycle.
Austin Campbell
He's probably focused on the AMD K5 for this internal RISC thing. Don't know if it's still correct for modern CPUs, though.
Cooper Lopez
Everything that hates unix and loves rust sucks nigger dick on a regular basis.
Carter Miller
finally, someone who has at least some understanding of the matter at hand
Joseph Taylor
What a shitty language.
Jack Mitchell
It's not live action, stop perpetuating this shit meme. Just say RPing or roleplaying.
Jose Ross
It is live action.
merriam-webster.com
merriam-webster.com