| To: | "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>, ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] tlbwr hazard for NEC VR4100 |
| From: | Yoichi Yuasa <yuasa@hh.iij4u.or.jp> |
| Date: | Thu, 2 Dec 2004 10:56:26 +0900 |
| Cc: | yuasa@hh.iij4u.or.jp, ralf@linux-mips.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.58L.0412020019050.20966@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <20041201234943.584d88e8.yuasa@hh.iij4u.or.jp> <20041202000713.GO3225@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <Pine.LNX.4.58L.0412020019050.20966@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 00:24:30 +0000 (GMT) "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > > > If 64bit kernels are ever relevant for VR41xx, you might want to use > > the same branch trick as it is used for R4[04]00. IIRC it reduced the > > handler size from 34 to 30 instructions, saving another branch. > > Isn't that based on specific properties of the R4[04]00 pipeline? It may > still work for the VR41xx, but you can't take it for granted, so it should > be double-checked. Given the conditions it's probably worth the hassle, > though. The specification of VR41xx does not have the guarantee to the branch trick. Furthermore, VR41xx has the NEC original pipeline. I think that the present method is exact for VR41xx. Yoichi |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] Improve atomic.h implementation robustness, Thiemo Seufer |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] Broadcom SWARM IDE in 2.6, Steven J. Hill |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] tlbwr hazard for NEC VR4100, Maciej W. Rozycki |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH 2.6] fix build error about NEC VR4100 series., Yoichi Yuasa |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |