Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "are_not_".
2016 Jan 12
3
[v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
..." are
converted to a heavy "SYNC 0" in many of that CPUs. However the latest
MIPS/Imagination CPU have a pipeline long enough to hit a problem -
absence of SYNC at LL/SC inside atomics, barriers etc.
> And reading the MIPS64 v6.04 instruction set manual, I think 0x11/0x12
> are_NOT_ transitive and therefore cannot be used to implement the
> smp_mb__{before,after} stuff.
>
> That is, in MIPS speak, those SYNC types are Ordering Barriers, not
> Completion Barriers.
Please see above, point 2.
> That is, currently all architectures -- with exception of PPC -- hav...
2016 Jan 12
3
[v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:40:12AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:25:55AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 10:27:11AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > 2) the changelog _completely_ fails to explain the sync 0x11 and sync
> > > 0x12 semantics nor does it provide a publicly accessible link to
> > > documentation
2016 Jan 12
3
[v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:40:12AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:25:55AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 10:27:11AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > 2) the changelog _completely_ fails to explain the sync 0x11 and sync
> > > 0x12 semantics nor does it provide a publicly accessible link to
> > > documentation
2016 Jan 12
0
[v3,11/41] mips: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
...gh to hit a problem - absence
> of SYNC at LL/SC inside atomics, barriers etc.
What ?! Are you saying that because R2 has short pipelines its unlikely
to hit the reordering issues and we can omit barriers?
> >And reading the MIPS64 v6.04 instruction set manual, I think 0x11/0x12
> >are_NOT_ transitive and therefore cannot be used to implement the
> >smp_mb__{before,after} stuff.
> >
> >That is, in MIPS speak, those SYNC types are Ordering Barriers, not
> >Completion Barriers.
>
> Please see above, point 2.
That did not in fact enlighten things. Are the...