linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 7/9] MIPS: BMIPS: Introduce bmips.h

To: Kevin Cernekee <cernekee@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] MIPS: BMIPS: Introduce bmips.h
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 15:03:33 +0000
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <1c70a0e0f9e1a3967b60c4c2d1ec99bd@localhost>
References: <c2c8833593cb8eeef5c102468e105497@localhost> <1c70a0e0f9e1a3967b60c4c2d1ec99bd@localhost>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 02:21:16PM -0700, Kevin Cernekee wrote:

> +static inline unsigned long bmips_read_zscm_reg(unsigned int offset)
> +{
> +     unsigned long ret;
> +
> +     cache_op(Index_Load_Tag_S, ZSCM_REG_BASE + offset);
> +
> +     __asm__ __volatile__(
> +             ".set push\n"
> +             ".set noreorder\n"
> +             "sync\n"
> +             "ssnop\n"
> +             "ssnop\n"
> +             "ssnop\n"
> +             "ssnop\n"
> +             "ssnop\n"
> +             "ssnop\n"
> +             "ssnop\n"
> +             "mfc0 %0, $28, 3\n"
> +             "ssnop\n"
> +             ".set pop\n"
> +             : "=&r" (ret) : : "memory");

Is it critical that the C compiler or assembler can't reorder anything to
in between the cache_op and the inline asm statement?  If so, I'd
recommend to put the cache instruction into the asm as well.

> +static inline void bmips_write_zscm_reg(unsigned int offset, unsigned long 
> data)
> +{
> +     __write_32bit_c0_register($28, 3, data);
> +     back_to_back_c0_hazard();
> +     cache_op(Index_Store_Tag_S, ZSCM_REG_BASE + offset);
> +     back_to_back_c0_hazard();

back_to_back_c0_hazard() is meant as the hazard barrier between a write
followed immediately by a read from the same cp0 register:

        mtc0    $reg1, $12
        mfc0    $reg2, $12

On various MIPS processors this instruction sequence would result in
undefined operation such as the mfc0 instruction reading the value of
$12 before the mtc0 or even next week's lucky lottery numbers..

I think we don't really have a type of hazard barrier defined in hazard.h
and this seems a rather special purpose use so I suggest you just open
code whatever needs to be done.

  Ralf

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