This is the mail archive of the
libc-ports@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the libc-ports project.
Re: [PATCH]: R10000 Needs LL/SC Workaround in Glibc
- From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at linux-mips dot org>
- To: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan at debian dot org>
- Cc: Kumba <kumba at gentoo dot org>, libc-ports at sources dot redhat dot com, Linux MIPS List <linux-mips at linux-mips dot org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:13:40 +0000 (GMT)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH]: R10000 Needs LL/SC Workaround in Glibc
- References: <490A912A.8030901@gentoo.org> <490C907A.40005@loowit.net> <4928D912.4050103@gentoo.org> <20090127152924.GA16379@caradoc.them.org>
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > 2008-11-22 Joshua Kinard <kumba@gentoo.org>
> >
> > * ports/sysdeps/mips/bits/atomic.h
> > (R10K_BEQZ_INSN, R10K_NOPS_INSN): Define depending on ISA.
> > (__arch_compare_and_exchange_xxx_32_int): Replace 'beqz' insn with
> > R10K_BEQZ_INSN and add R10K_NOPS_INSN.
> > (__arch_compare_and_exchange_xxx_64_int): Likewise
> > (__arch_exchange_xxx_32_int): Likewise
> > (__arch_exchange_xxx_64_int): Likewise
> > (__arch_exchange_and_add_32_int): Likewise
> > (__arch_exchange_and_add_64_int): Likewise
>
> Thinking about this...
>
> MIPS I: 28 NOPs is really horrid. Not so much on this processor if
> the code is all in cache, but I guess that older/simpler processors
> are going to sit for a number of cycles chewing through those NOPs.
> Are distributions still building MIPS I code? Can we assume that
> people who want to run glibc on an R10K can at least get something
> for MIPS II?
I agree this is horrible. I would rather not have a workaround for a
broken chip in the official sources at all than badly hit good chips
(comprising the vast majority). Unless this can be made a compile-time
option, so that whoever is interested in it can use "-march=mips1
-mfix-r10000" or suchlike to get it activated, I am against the change.
> MIPS II, MIPS III, MIPS IV: Using beqzl does not seem particularly
> horrid - although it's still a shame since this branch is in fact
> anti-likely. It will almost never be taken.
Again if only "-march=mips2 -mfix-r10000" etc. activates it, then I am
fine with that, otherwise it is a no-no for me.
> Other platforms: !(MIPS II or MIPS III or MIPS IV) is not the same as
> (MIPS I)! Please don't activate this workaround on builds that won't
> run on an R10K, like MIPS32.
Nothing to add here. ;)
Maciej