6 ms·
First, a note on the name: the official name from ARM is "AArch64", but this is a silly name that pains me to type. Apple calls it ARM64, and that's what I will
by corresation 13y ago
First, a note on the name: the official name from ARM is "AArch64", but this is a silly name that pains me to type. Apple calls it ARM64, and that's what I will call it too.
What ARM calls ARM related periphery is canonical, whether you think it's silly or not.
However the overarching entity is called ARMv8, with the 64-bit state called AArch64 (which can be contrasted with the AArch32 state, which is also a part of ARMv8) and the instruction set is actually called A64.
- mikeash 13y ago"What ARM calls ARM related periphery is canonical, whether you think it's silly or not." And why, exactly, should I care?
- pohl 13y agoBecause the canon contains the words of consecration, by which we dedicate ourselves to divine purpose.
- corresation 13y agoMaybe you don't, however the comment was really more generally targeted given that we're discussing it here. However when you start renaming things, other things start to not make sense. For instance- "It's important to note that ARM64 includes a full 32-bit compatibility mode that allows running normal 32-bit ARM code without any changes and without emulation." If ARM64 == AArch64 (which is what you decided), then no, this doesn't make sense. ARMv8 includes both AArch64 and optionally AArch32, the former running A64, the latter running traditional ARM. There are ARMv8 designs that actually can't run any traditional 32-bit code.
- mikeash 13y agoAs I pointed out, that's Apple renaming it, not me. I'm just following their lead. As for 32-bit compatibility, that has nothing to do with renaming, it's just me being imprecise. It would be equally imprecise if I had used "AArch64". Thank you for pointing it out, though, I've fixed it to say that it is the A7 that includes 32-bit compatibility.
- Someone 13y agoNot all official names survive a confrontation with reality, where 'easier to remember' and 'easier to pronounce' have value, too. Do you use the terms IA-32e and EM64T, too (both are/were Intel's official names for what people now typically call x64 or x86-64)?
- maaku 13y agoEM64T & x86_64 only exist because Intel has too much pride to call it what it is: AMD64.
- scott_karana 13y agoThe name "x86_64" existed before AMD fully released their CPUs, and was latched onto by some of the open-source communities, so that specific one isn't exactly Intel's. But you're right about EM64T. :)
- ChuckMcM 13y agoI do not believe this is true. Do you have a reference that used that name x86_64 before Intel shipped its first AMD64 compatible CPU?
- maggit 13y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64 says "Prior to launch, "x86-64" and "x86_64" were used to refer to the instruction set. Upon release, AMD named it AMD64." and refers to https://wiki.debian.org/DebianAMD64Faq https://wiki.debian.org/DebianAMD64Faq which says ""AMD64" is the name chosen by AMD for their 64-bit extension to the Intel x86 instruction set. Before release, it was called "x86-64" or "x86_64", and some distributions still use these names." I, myself, had an AMD Opteron machine on which I ran an x86-64 build, with that name for the architecture, of SUSE Linux before Intel released their EM64T.
- scott_karana 13y agoHere's a source to back up maggit's Wikipedia citations: http://www.amd.com/us/press-releases/Pages/Press_Release_715.aspx http://www.amd.com/us/press-releases/Pages/Press_Release_715... Dated 8/10/2000.
- sanxiyn 13y agoI personally use Debian port names. Debian is pretty sensible about it. Debian uses "amd64" and "arm64".
- justincormack 13y agoIs there also a new registers but 32 bit pointers model like x32?
- rsynnott 13y ago> What ARM calls ARM related periphery is canonical, whether you think it's silly or not. Ah, yes, that must be why everyone in the world calls the 64bit x86 instruction set either AMD64 or IA-32E.
- corresation 13y agoIn this case the author directly conflates an architecture, state, and instruction set, which is exactly why this sort of 'well I will call it...' Nonsense is ill advised. But hey, good try right?
- mikeash 13y agoThanks for your correction. Oh wait, you didn't correct anything! Do you really think that if I had called it AArch64 throughout instead of ARM64, I wouldn't have written... whatever it is you're offended by in terms of conflating various parts? You're nuts!