lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] WorkStruct: Implement generic UP cmpxchg() where an arch doesn't support it


On Fri, 8 Dec 2006, Russell King wrote:
>
> Yes you can. Well, you can on ARM at least. Between the load exclusive
> you can do anything you like until you hit the store exclusive. If you
> haven't touched the location (with anything other than another load
> exclusive) and no other CPU has issued a load exclusive, your store
> exclusive succeeds.

Is that actually true?

Almost all LL/SC implementations have granularity rules, where "touch the
location" is not a byte-granular thing, but actually ends up being
something like "touch the same cachline".

They also often have _other_ rules like: "the cacheline has to stay in the
L1 in exclusive state" etc. Which means that in a direct-mapped L1 cache,
you can't even load anything that might be in the same way, because it
would cause a cache eviction that invalidates the SC.

It's possible that ARM has really strong LL/SC, but quite frankly, that
sounds unlikely. I've never heard of anybody ever _architecturally_ saying
that they support that strong requirements, even if certain micro-
architectures might actually support stronger semantics than the ones
guaranteed by the architectural rules.

Linus
-
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: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.112 / U:0.904 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site