[Top] [All Lists]

Re: mips octeon memory model questions

To: Peter Zijlstra <>
Subject: Re: mips octeon memory model questions
From: Linus Torvalds <>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:58:40 -0800
Cc: David Daney <>, Ralf Baechle <>, "" <>, linux-mips <>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <>, Paul McKenney <>, Will Deacon <>
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=SfYU7T412mZLvbxJxmSPOuac37Ye7WmIVCQN9H6jFlk=; b=DP/1qkcPnMR9kj3wOVk4wUFaURSMqcPNTbz1eW8A3cLVzcFKtXhmbwX230ssKeZnih UYytA4TueiMlN+V8WEVdk4dISxr062U1/xLEPFU4J/u2x9xMz9T9trrsD1ZEFxhm7ezq MtI2i0ArcoMIQNQy4QkcmGcI+PCtLNDxVxOXGV3dG3gBHxUguUlOcel4l5omdKeMu0Ci s2fhUo4sZH6uCvwgZf7K9DjljBdny+QQN9ZoFjG/QUm6NkTg4DZYSkal0sRY4jIfqyUa Of1AwHIh2iZZOQdk3PpezeX0F5cqmlnarOanOOoPuZlgVQisItHc6TkndoUpkeKNdhXc FQjg==
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=SfYU7T412mZLvbxJxmSPOuac37Ye7WmIVCQN9H6jFlk=; b=b/XnEatpb7bnhu3VAfy/QXHwIVBVDZzXY3/hHul0obE4Aj8srKAqMPQ1UPYcWS4gBS RkoASHiH1cFd0JhOaiul7TTvty+JGpayJvLbtmYS/XX42kE05lVK4ncMKbe+j0K1vYP8 h1xbEL9wEQAqhF89eM+ZwWqL3Cz6UDUIZ+Je4=
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <>
List-help: <>
List-id: linux-mips <>
List-owner: <>
List-post: <>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <>
List-unsubscribe: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <>
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra <> wrote:
> Still doesn't make sense, because if we need the first sync to stop
> writes from being re-ordered with the ll-sc, we also need the second
> sync to avoid the same.

Presumably octeon doesn't do speculative writes, only *buffered* writes.

So writes move down, not up.

But it looks like Cavium is one of those clown companies that have a
"contact us" button for technical documentation rather than actually
making it available.

Christ, why would anybody do business with a tech company that hides
technical details? Seriously, that just stinks of "we have so many
bugs that we cannot make the documentation available".


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