linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/3] fixed mtc0_tlbw_hazard

To: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] fixed mtc0_tlbw_hazard
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:28:06 +0100
Cc: Yoichi Yuasa <yoichi_yuasa@tripeaks.co.jp>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <4512C55A.6070206@ru.mvista.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20060922010713.657f2861.yoichi_yuasa@tripeaks.co.jp> <4512BC2A.6040003@dev.rtsoft.ru> <20060922014142.2a1985c1.yoichi_yuasa@tripeaks.co.jp> <4512C55A.6070206@ru.mvista.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 09:01:14PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:

>    I fail to see what was changed WRT SB1 CPUs by the suspected patch. 
>    Though wait... the previous version was inconsistent, using the different 
> barrier definitions for C and assembly (nops in the former, and branch in 
> the latter). But since the assembly version was not really used, it 
> couldn't break anything... :-/
> 
>    Anyway, shouldn't ssnop's be used for SB1 instead? CPU has quad-issue 
> pipeline, hasn't it?

SB1 is almost fully interlocked so the right thing to do is doing nothing.

  Ralf

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