From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: bit fields && data tearing Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 19:08:48 -0700 Message-ID: <54091B30.2090509@zytor.com> References: <20140712181328.GA8738@redhat.com> <54079B70.4050200@hurleysoftware.com> <1409785893.30640.118.camel@pasglop> <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D17487172@AcuExch.aculab.com> <1409824374.4246.62.camel@pasglop> <5408E458.3@zytor.com> <54090AF4.7060406@hurleysoftware.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <54090AF4.7060406@hurleysoftware.com> Sender: linux-alpha-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Peter Hurley , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , David Laight Cc: Jakub Jelinek , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Tony Luck , "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" , Oleg Nesterov , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Paul Mackerras , "Paul E. McKenney" , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , Miroslav Franc , Richard Henderson , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org On 09/04/2014 05:59 PM, Peter Hurley wrote: > I have no idea how prevalent the ev56 is compared to the ev5. > Still we're talking about a chip that came out in 1996. Ah yes, I stand corrected. According to Wikipedia, the affected CPUs were all the 2106x CPUs (EV4, EV45, LCA4, LCA45) plus the 21164 with no suffix (EV5). However, we're still talking about museum pieces here. I wonder what the one I have in my garage is... I'm sure I could emulate it faster, though. -hpa From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2014 02:08:48 +0000 Subject: Re: bit fields && data tearing Message-Id: <54091B30.2090509@zytor.com> List-Id: References: <20140712181328.GA8738@redhat.com> <54079B70.4050200@hurleysoftware.com> <1409785893.30640.118.camel@pasglop> <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D17487172@AcuExch.aculab.com> <1409824374.4246.62.camel@pasglop> <5408E458.3@zytor.com> <54090AF4.7060406@hurleysoftware.com> In-Reply-To: <54090AF4.7060406@hurleysoftware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Peter Hurley , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , David Laight Cc: Jakub Jelinek , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Tony Luck , "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" , Oleg Nesterov , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Paul Mackerras , "Paul E. McKenney" , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , Miroslav Franc , Richard Henderson , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org On 09/04/2014 05:59 PM, Peter Hurley wrote: > I have no idea how prevalent the ev56 is compared to the ev5. > Still we're talking about a chip that came out in 1996. Ah yes, I stand corrected. According to Wikipedia, the affected CPUs were all the 2106x CPUs (EV4, EV45, LCA4, LCA45) plus the 21164 with no suffix (EV5). However, we're still talking about museum pieces here. I wonder what the one I have in my garage is... I'm sure I could emulate it faster, though. -hpa From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.zytor.com (terminus.zytor.com [IPv6:2001:1868:205::10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D7051A15D5 for ; Fri, 5 Sep 2014 12:09:12 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <54091B30.2090509@zytor.com> Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 19:08:48 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Hurley , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , David Laight Subject: Re: bit fields && data tearing References: <20140712181328.GA8738@redhat.com> <54079B70.4050200@hurleysoftware.com> <1409785893.30640.118.camel@pasglop> <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D17487172@AcuExch.aculab.com> <1409824374.4246.62.camel@pasglop> <5408E458.3@zytor.com> <54090AF4.7060406@hurleysoftware.com> In-Reply-To: <54090AF4.7060406@hurleysoftware.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Jakub Jelinek , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Tony Luck , "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" , Oleg Nesterov , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Paul Mackerras , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, "Paul E. McKenney" , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , Miroslav Franc , Richard Henderson List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 09/04/2014 05:59 PM, Peter Hurley wrote: > I have no idea how prevalent the ev56 is compared to the ev5. > Still we're talking about a chip that came out in 1996. Ah yes, I stand corrected. According to Wikipedia, the affected CPUs were all the 2106x CPUs (EV4, EV45, LCA4, LCA45) plus the 21164 with no suffix (EV5). However, we're still talking about museum pieces here. I wonder what the one I have in my garage is... I'm sure I could emulate it faster, though. -hpa