ds/bits contains decidedly not bit-like things

[nwf]

pause(), tick(), tickp(), halt_out_of_order(), benchmark_time_start(), and benchmark_time_end() really seem like they belong somewhere else, probably within the PAL. Is there a reason they're here instead?

[mjp41]

So I viewed bits.h as the CPU abstraction, and the pal.h as the OS/platform abstraction. These are somewhat orthogonal, and if we put all the CPU abstraction stuff into each pal, then I think we will get a blow up in cases. That said, it might be worth refactoring bits.h, to separate the CPU abstraction, from various bit manipulating code.

Sylvan Clebsch (@sylvanc) David Chisnall (@davidchisnall) thoughts?

[sylvanc]

It's a good point. I think a timing.h containing all the functions Nathaniel Wesley Filardo (@nwf) mentions would be good. Possibly also separating out SNMALLOC_ASSUME and Construction. I think the PAL isn't quite right, as the PAL depends on mem, which depends on ds, so I think this stuff should stay in ds.

[davidchisnall]

I think we want to maintain a separation of architecture and platform abstractions. So far, the only in-tree architecture that we're using is x86, so there hasn't been much need for an arch abstraction layer, but as we add more then having a tangle of ifdefs is going to be a pain and we probably do want to have a clean architecture abstraction.