All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>,
	"Ralf Baechle" <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Cc: "Gilad Benjamini" <yaelgilad@myrealbox.com>, <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: lwl-lwr
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:40:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <007a01c31f9e$8a784ee0$10eca8c0@grendel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.GSO.3.96.1030521115345.2088D-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl

>From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl
>

> On Wed, 21 May 2003, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> 
> > > There's really no such thing as "disabling" lwl/lwr.  They are part 
> > > of the base MIPS instruction set.  If one wants to live without them, 
> > > one can either rig a compiler to emit multi-instruction sequences instead 
> > > of lwr/lwl to do the appropriate shifts and masks (which is slower on all 
> > > targets), or you can rig the OS to emulate them, and hope that the processors 
> > > lacking support will take clean reserved instruction traps, where the function 
> > > can be emulated (which is "free" for code running  on CPUs with lwl/lwr, 
> > > but *really* slow for the guys doing emulation).
> > 
> > Technically you're right ...  In reality lwl/lwr are covered by US patent
> > 4,814,976 which would also cover a software implementation.  So unless MIPS
> > grants a license for the purpose of emulation in the Linux kernel ...
> 
>  For practical reasons I believe it can be dealt with without patent
> infringing, but I am not that excited with doing anything at all about it. 

I agree.  I've never read the patent, but now that you mention it, I do
recall having heard that it covers software implementations.  Lets just
leave this one alone...

            Kevin K.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Cc: Gilad Benjamini <yaelgilad@myrealbox.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: lwl-lwr
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:40:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <007a01c31f9e$8a784ee0$10eca8c0@grendel> (raw)
Message-ID: <20030521134025.lEc3Q5W-jilk0tbPNJy8l5mMxmoOE3Md24xeA6kme2Y@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.GSO.3.96.1030521115345.2088D-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl

>From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl
>

> On Wed, 21 May 2003, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> 
> > > There's really no such thing as "disabling" lwl/lwr.  They are part 
> > > of the base MIPS instruction set.  If one wants to live without them, 
> > > one can either rig a compiler to emit multi-instruction sequences instead 
> > > of lwr/lwl to do the appropriate shifts and masks (which is slower on all 
> > > targets), or you can rig the OS to emulate them, and hope that the processors 
> > > lacking support will take clean reserved instruction traps, where the function 
> > > can be emulated (which is "free" for code running  on CPUs with lwl/lwr, 
> > > but *really* slow for the guys doing emulation).
> > 
> > Technically you're right ...  In reality lwl/lwr are covered by US patent
> > 4,814,976 which would also cover a software implementation.  So unless MIPS
> > grants a license for the purpose of emulation in the Linux kernel ...
> 
>  For practical reasons I believe it can be dealt with without patent
> infringing, but I am not that excited with doing anything at all about it. 

I agree.  I've never read the patent, but now that you mention it, I do
recall having heard that it covers software implementations.  Lets just
leave this one alone...

            Kevin K.

  reply	other threads:[~2003-05-21 13:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-05-20 18:32 lwl-lwr Gilad Benjamini
2003-05-20 18:34 ` lwl-lwr Will Jhun
2003-05-20 19:07 ` lwl-lwr Kevin D. Kissell
2003-05-20 19:07   ` lwl-lwr Kevin D. Kissell
2003-05-21  0:34   ` lwl-lwr Ralf Baechle
2003-05-21  9:56     ` lwl-lwr Maciej W. Rozycki
2003-05-21 13:40       ` Kevin D. Kissell [this message]
2003-05-21 13:40         ` lwl-lwr Kevin D. Kissell
2003-05-21 12:49     ` lwl-lwr Alan Cox

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='007a01c31f9e$8a784ee0$10eca8c0@grendel' \
    --to=kevink@mips.com \
    --cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl \
    --cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=yaelgilad@myrealbox.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.