linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: mips32_flush_cache routine corrupts CP0_STATUS with gcc-2.96

To: Dominic Sweetman <dom@algor.co.uk>
Subject: Re: mips32_flush_cache routine corrupts CP0_STATUS with gcc-2.96
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 20:40:17 +0200 (MET DST)
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@oss.sgi.com>, "Gleb O. Raiko" <raiko@niisi.msk.ru>, Carsten Langgaard <carstenl@mips.com>, Jon Burgess <Jon_Burgess@eur.3com.com>, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
In-reply-to: <15662.3715.334923.669657@gladsmuir.algor.co.uk>
Organization: Technical University of Gdansk
Reply-to: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>
Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Dominic Sweetman wrote:

> PS: my standard appeal.  When you say you 'flush' a cache do you mean
> invalidate, write-back, or both?  If (as I suspect) not all of you
> mean the same thing, should you not instead speak of 'invalidate' and
> 'writeback'... sloppy language surely leads to sloppy programming?

 For me, a "flush" is both (i.e., as Gleb noticed, that's what functions
with the word in names do).  For a lone write back or invalidation, I
would use these terms respectively.

 Well, for the R3k the term is unambiguous anyway...

-- 
+  Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland   +
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
+        e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available        +



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>