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-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <54090AF4.7060406@hurleysoftware.com> Sender: linux-alpha-owner@vger.kernel.org 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 List-Id: linux-arch.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 terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:40864 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750961AbaIECJS (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Sep 2014 22:09:18 -0400 Message-ID: <54091B30.2090509@zytor.com> Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 19:08:48 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 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 Message-ID: <20140905020848.WFEtfACNQtCjdaOEbkMloGnM70Z_pMjqSyU57bvGrjA@z> 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