Harald Koerfgen (email@example.com) writes:
> After carefully re-resing the IDT Manual ant glance at the SGI
> Manual, it is my understanding, that indeed there is a difference in
> the exception mechanism between the R3000 and the R4000.
Yes, there are some very big differences concealed behind what look
like almost the same registers...
> R4000: *All* TLB misses cause a TLB refill exception. If a TLB miss
> happens in the exception routine itself...
Strictly speaking, that's "if a TLB miss happens with the status
register exception level bit set" - SR(EXL) for short. But you're
right, the only time that will actually happen will be the TLB miss
incurred by the table look-up of the fast TLB miss.
> ..., a TLBL or TLBS exception is caused. This is handled
> bye the general exception handler.
> R3000: *Only* references to KSEG0 (0x00000000- 0x7fffffff) may cause
> a TLB exception. TLB misses with references to KSEG2 (0xc0000000 -
> 0xffffffff !!!) cause a TLBL or TLBS exception, which is handled by
> the general exception handler.
That's right; so unix application TLB misses are handled fast, but any
kernel-translation misses get a bigger penalty. It's up to the OS
writer to minimise the latter.
Both mechanisms support the mechanism built around the "Context"
register which helps out a translation scheme using a main page table
which is apparently "flat" but is actually located in kernel virtual
But yes, Harald, that sounds right.
PS: I wrote most of the IDT manual, so I hope it helped... My
forthcoming book has the R4x00 stuff in too, and should be out
next year, pub Morgan Kaufmann.