On Thu, 2002-12-19 at 19:04, Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky wrote:
>
> > > And that would now really work when CONFIG_X86_OOSTORE=1 is required
> > > [after all, it is a write, so it'd need the equivalent of a wmb() or
> > > xchg()].
> >
> > Is this a hint that your employer may have an x86 chip in the future
> > with weak ordering? :)
>
> Hmmm ... taking into account that there are some many thousands of
> employees in my company and that I know less than one hundred ...
> and that they are all software ... well, I don't think I am into
> the rumour mill :]
Also OOSTORE is there because other vendors already make weak store
order capable x86 processors. One example of this is the Winchip - where
turning off strict store ordering is worth 30% performance.
In addition you have to treat store ordering/locking carefully due to
the pentium pro store fencing errata. (Thats why our < PII kernel
generates lock movb to unlock when in theory the lock isnt needed).
Alan
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 23 2002 - 22:00:25 EST