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