Does anyone know how to disable Visual Studio with SP4 from displaying the
MM/XMM registers in the register window ?
Regards,
Paul Bunn, UltraBac.com, 425-644-6000
Microsoft MVP - WindowsNT/2000
http://www.ultrabac.com
>Does anyone know how to disable Visual Studio with SP4 from displaying the
MM/XMM registers in the register window ?
If you run on an AMD processor does it try to show XMM registers? As there
are none. Does it should 3DNow format instead? Wasn’t there a switch to
turn off FP register display, or was that WinDbg only.
I’m glad Microsoft FINALLY added this feature, although MANY minus points
for taking so long. I still have horrible memories of debugging MMX code
(LONG after MMX capable processors shipped) by inserting macros that would
copy everything to a shadow memory structure between EVERY MMX instruction.
It seemed just unbelievable the debugger could not display these important
registers for so long. As I remember, the Intel MMX register show utility
only worked on Win9x, which I refused to let near any of my systems.
Speaking of Microsoft tools being behind, I noticed you can download (for
free, from Intel) an instruction simulator for Itanium processors, and
develop Itanium Linux code NOW, on your x86 system.
Of course has anybody calculated how Intel can possible make Itanium
processor development profitable anytime soon. I though the magic of x86
processor development funding was based on VOLUME. If we believe it costs
just as much to develop an Itanium as a new Pentium III, and we believe the
volume of Itanium’s will be like 2% of the x86 line, that suggests you
would have to have HUGELY higher prices (like 20x). I just can’t see
$10,000 Itanium processors being competitive with SMP or clustered x86’s.
Microsoft seems like they have clearly expressed an unwillingness to
support W2K on any processor with only a few percent market share. I
suppose Intel may sell Itaniums at a huge loss for many years, to try and
capture market share. Wall street is not exactly being nice to companies
with this kind of strategy at the moment.
- Jan
Pundits believe Itanium processors will be initially available for around
$3K, and it’s not expected to replace the low/mid market segments for a long
time.
MSFT are fully supporting IA64 for Whistler, but are continuing to build
Win2K/64 for Alpha as a portability exercise. That approach is also useful
for performance comparisons, and also to determine whether it is a
compiler/hardware related issue rather than a bug in MS’s code.
The “floating point registers” check-box does not affect the display of the
MMX registers.
On the Athlon, only MM0 thru MM7 are displayed.
Regards,
Paul Bunn, UltraBac.com, 425-644-6000
Microsoft MVP - WindowsNT/2000
http://www.ultrabac.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Bottorff [mailto:xxxxx@pmatrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2000 3:20 AM
To: NT Developers Interest List
Subject: [ntdev] Re: Horrid SP4 / Visual Studio “feature”
Does anyone know how to disable Visual Studio with SP4 from displaying the
MM/XMM registers in the register window ?
If you run on an AMD processor does it try to show XMM registers? As there
are none. Does it should 3DNow format instead? Wasn’t there a switch to
turn off FP register display, or was that WinDbg only.
I’m glad Microsoft FINALLY added this feature, although MANY minus points
for taking so long. I still have horrible memories of debugging MMX code
(LONG after MMX capable processors shipped) by inserting macros that would
copy everything to a shadow memory structure between EVERY MMX instruction.
It seemed just unbelievable the debugger could not display these important
registers for so long. As I remember, the Intel MMX register show utility
only worked on Win9x, which I refused to let near any of my systems.
Speaking of Microsoft tools being behind, I noticed you can download (for
free, from Intel) an instruction simulator for Itanium processors, and
develop Itanium Linux code NOW, on your x86 system.
Of course has anybody calculated how Intel can possible make Itanium
processor development profitable anytime soon. I though the magic of x86
processor development funding was based on VOLUME. If we believe it costs
just as much to develop an Itanium as a new Pentium III, and we believe the
volume of Itanium’s will be like 2% of the x86 line, that suggests you
would have to have HUGELY higher prices (like 20x). I just can’t see
$10,000 Itanium processors being competitive with SMP or clustered x86’s.
Microsoft seems like they have clearly expressed an unwillingness to
support W2K on any processor with only a few percent market share. I
suppose Intel may sell Itaniums at a huge loss for many years, to try and
capture market share. Wall street is not exactly being nice to companies
with this kind of strategy at the moment.