[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8CA974F497CA064FA9926E10ABCC061F05F97E7B77@MAILSJ4.global.cadence.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 12:38:56 -0700
From: Marc Gauthier <marc@...ence.com>
To: "paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
CC: Michael Cree <mcree@...on.net.nz>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Miroslav Franc <mfranc@...hat.com>,
Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
"linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org" <linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: bit fields && data tearing
Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 02:50:31PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
>>On 09/05/2014 02:09 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> This commit documents the fact that it is not safe to use bitfields as
>>> shared variables in synchronization algorithms. It also documents that
>>> CPUs must provide one-byte and two-byte load and store instructions
>> ^
>> atomic
>
> Here you meant non-atomic? My guess is that you are referring to the
> fact that you could emulate a one-byte store on pre-EV56 Alpha CPUs
> using the ll and sc atomic-read-modify-write instructions, correct?
>
>>> in order to be supported by the Linux kernel. (Michael Cree
>>> has agreed to the resulting non-support of pre-EV56 Alpha CPUs:
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/5/143.
[...]
>>> + and 64-bit systems, respectively. Note that this means that the
>>> + Linux kernel does not support pre-EV56 Alpha CPUs, because these
>>> + older CPUs do not provide one-byte and two-byte loads and stores.
>> ^
>> non-atomic
>
> I took this, thank you!
Eum, am I totally lost, or aren't both of these supposed to say "atomic" ?
Can't imagine requiring a CPU to provide non-atomic loads and stores
(i.e. requiring old Alpha behavior?).
-Marc
--
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