[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710161221300.1315@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 12:33:54 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@...ax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: LFENCE instruction (was: [rfc][patch 3/3] x86: optimise barriers)
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > The cpus also have an explicit set of instructions that deliberately do
> > > unordered stores/loads, and s/lfence etc are mostly designed for those.
> >
> > I know about unordered stores (movnti & similar) --- they basically use
> > write-combining method on memory that is normally write-back --- and they
> > need sfence. But which one instruction does unordered load and needs
> > lefence?
>
> Also, for non-wb memory. I don't think the Intel document referenced
> says anything about this, but the AMD document says that loads can pass
> loads (page 8, rule b).
>
> This is why our rmb() is still an lfence.
I see, AMD says that WC memory loads can be out-of-order.
There is very little usability to it --- framebuffer and AGP aperture is
the only piece of memory that is WC and no kernel structures are placed
there, so it is possible to remove that lfence.
Mikulas
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists