Re: [Linux-ia64] New rev 2.1 SDM for Itanium published

Bjorn Helgaas
2002-11-22T20:07:43Z

On Friday 22 November 2002 11:27 am, David Mosberger wrote:
> >>>>> On Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:08:39 -0800, "Jim Hull" <jim_hull@hp.com> said:
>
> >> If so, should this be noted somewhere so that naive
> >> people who read the manuals don't assume that it's implemented?
>
> Jim> There is a new "ao" bit in CPUID[4], which as described on p. 1:32, will
> Jim> be 1 only if the new larger atomic ops are implemented. Do you think
> Jim> this is insufficient?
>
> The ao bit seems to have gotten lost in the final version of SDM2.1.
> It's mentioned (indirectly) in the Document Revision history, but in
> the CPUID[4] description, only "branchlong" and "spontaneous deferral"
> show up.

Also, seems like the cmp8xchg16 instruction description ought to
mention that not all implementations support the instruction.
At least, that's what was done for "brl".

--
Bjorn Helgaas - bjorn_helgaas at hp.com
Linux and Open Source Lab
Hewlett-Packard Company