From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f36BdYL24728 for linux-mips-outgoing; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 04:39:34 -0700 Received: from mx.mips.com (mx.mips.com [206.31.31.226]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f36BdXM24725 for ; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 04:39:33 -0700 Received: from newman.mips.com (ns-dmz [206.31.31.225]) by mx.mips.com (8.9.3/8.9.0) with ESMTP id EAA09889; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 04:39:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Ulysses (ulysses [192.168.236.13]) by newman.mips.com (8.9.3/8.9.0) with SMTP id EAA03686; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 04:39:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <00a401c0be8e$cfc065a0$0deca8c0@Ulysses> From: "Kevin D. Kissell" To: "Florian Lohoff" , Cc: References: <20010406130958.A14083@paradigm.rfc822.org> <20010406132214.D14083@paradigm.rfc822.org> Subject: Re: first packages for mipsel Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 13:43:24 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk > On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 01:09:58PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote: > There are multiple solutions to this problem: > > - ll/sc emulation in the kernel > Implementing an ll/sc emulation into the fast path of the illegal instruction > handler and compile the glibc with ll/sc support. > > - repair sysmips > Sysmips is essentially broken - My fix i have sent to the linux-mips list > is only a workaround but not a fix. Also there is currentl NO ISA I support > in the sysmips implementation. I hope to get around to build a proper > fix this weekend in assembly. > > Probably we will do both - An even better solution would be to let the glibc > detect the ISA level or the existance of ll/sc in userspace and replace _test_and_set > with one or the other primitiv - Using sysmips on R3000 or ll/sc less systems. What advantage would there be to using sysmips() as opposed to doing the ll/sc emulation? It seems to me that the decode path in the kernel would be just as fast, and there would be a single "ABI" for all programs - the ll/sc instructions themselves. Kevin K. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <00a401c0be8e$cfc065a0$0deca8c0@Ulysses> From: "Kevin D. Kissell" References: <20010406130958.A14083@paradigm.rfc822.org> <20010406132214.D14083@paradigm.rfc822.org> Subject: Re: first packages for mipsel Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 13:43:24 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com To: Florian Lohoff , debian-mips@lists.debian.org Cc: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <20010406114324.uD2F1x3Vbe-FC1w9tGvUy4LPH1qmvFJrZsn3kt3phbE@z> > On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 01:09:58PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote: > There are multiple solutions to this problem: > > - ll/sc emulation in the kernel > Implementing an ll/sc emulation into the fast path of the illegal instruction > handler and compile the glibc with ll/sc support. > > - repair sysmips > Sysmips is essentially broken - My fix i have sent to the linux-mips list > is only a workaround but not a fix. Also there is currentl NO ISA I support > in the sysmips implementation. I hope to get around to build a proper > fix this weekend in assembly. > > Probably we will do both - An even better solution would be to let the glibc > detect the ISA level or the existance of ll/sc in userspace and replace _test_and_set > with one or the other primitiv - Using sysmips on R3000 or ll/sc less systems. What advantage would there be to using sysmips() as opposed to doing the ll/sc emulation? It seems to me that the decode path in the kernel would be just as fast, and there would be a single "ABI" for all programs - the ll/sc instructions themselves. Kevin K.