lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Aug]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] [RFC] [2.5 i386] GCC 3.1 -march support, PPRO_FENCE reduction, prefetch fixes and other CPU-related changes
From
Date
On Sun, 2002-08-04 at 21:43, Luca Barbieri wrote:
> > When we use MMX/SSE we need the view to be consistent anyway so the
> > various copying routines already handle this internally.
> That's why sfence is not used unless CONFIG_X86_OOSTORE (and
> CONFIG_X86_MMXEXT) is defined.
> mfence and lfence instead replace the "lock; addl $0,0(%%esp)". Is this
> wrong?

I'm trying to understand why you think they are needed at all. Except
for code that specifically does non-temporal we don't need fences on an
X86, and the code that uses non temporal stores has its own fences built
in.

So as far as I can see the only cases we ever have to care about are

PPro - processor bug
IDT Winchip - because we run it in oostore module not strict x86 mode

I don't see why you are generating extra fence instructions for other
cases

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans