Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 06:05:17PM +0200, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> > Huh? Coherent caching mode can be used for a few processors only, namely
> > R400MC and presumably SB1 (inferred from the sources), i.e. the ones
> > that support the interprocessor coherency protocol. If you know of any
> > other processor that supports the protocol, I'd be pleased to see a
> > reference to a spec -- I hoped someone, possibly you, would fill the
> > missing bits when I proposed the patch a month ago. Nobody bothered,
> > though, sigh...
> > I see your changes are broken conceptually, as the caching mode for the
> > TLB should be inferred from the CPU configuration in the first place and
> > not the system selection (actually it should be best selected ath the run
> > time). Hence I'd invert the flag, since most systems are non-coherent,
> > and only permit it for certain processors.
> Back in time I prefered CONFIG_NONCOHERENT_IO over CONFIG_COHERENT_IO
> because the noncoherent case needs additional code and in general I'm
> trying to reduce the number of the #if !defined conditionals for easier
> The R10000 is our standard example why looking at the processor type doesn't
> work. It's used in coherent mode in IP27 but in coherent mode but in
> coherent mode in IP28 or IP32. Otoh I don't know of any system that
> supports coherency but also is being used with non-coherent processors.
> > Using a non-coherent
> > configuration for an UP system that supports coherency (do SGI IP27 and
> > SiByte SB1250 have another agent in the chipset that may issue coherent
> > requests regardless of the number of processors started?)
> Yes. That's how coherency is working - all agents have to support coherent
> requests or coherency simply won't work. So basically we'd be trully
> picky we'd have to verify that all agents, processor and other support
> coherency but just using the system type seems to be sufficient.
The Malta board is a system that both run coherent and non-coherent, so I would
prefer, that we either make the coherency a configuration option or make it
possible to determine at run time.
> > results in a
> > performance hit only due to superfluous invalidations, but using a
> > coherent configuration for a processor/system that doesn't support it may
> > lead to a hard to debug hang with no apparent reason (as I wrote
> > previously, even NMI/Reset stopped working on my system -- I had to hit
> > the power switch).
> Using a non-coherent mode on IP27 may result in nice, hard to trackdown bus
_ _ ____ ___ Carsten Langgaard Mailto:email@example.com
|\ /|||___)(___ MIPS Denmark Direct: +45 4486 5527
| \/ ||| ____) Lautrupvang 4B Switch: +45 4486 5555
TECHNOLOGIES 2750 Ballerup Fax...: +45 4486 5556