linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LL and SC instruction simulation

To: "Ralf Baechle" <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: LL and SC instruction simulation
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 16:47:01 +0100
Cc: "Sathesh Babu Edara" <satheshbabu.edara@analog.com>, <linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org>, <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <200601090742.k097gYaZ017304@lilac.hdcindia.analog.com> <200601090749.k097nFaZ017891@lilac.hdcindia.analog.com> <20060109145425.GA4286@linux-mips.org> <00af01c6152f$dc1863f0$10eca8c0@grendel> <20060109152148.GD4286@linux-mips.org> <20060109153028.GA6542@linux-mips.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
> > > Is there an interface where 2.6 might be telling library code to use 
> > > system calls
> > > instead LL/SC, where the 2.4 kernel didn't?
> > 
> > No.
> 
> And I think it's not really worth it.  MIPS II did introduce ll/sc in
> 1991 and it was becoming widely available with MIPS III and some pseudo-
> MIPS II R3000 variants also in the embedded markets and MIPS32/MIPS64
> were based on that.  So ll/sc-less processors are a very small part of
> the market of Linux/MIPS these days, not really worth to optimize for.

Hmm.  I can think of at least one *very* high volume MIPS Linux platform still
manufactured by a very large Japanese electronics company where LL/SC
either isn't implemented or doesn't work...  

            Regards,

            Kevin K.

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