From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by oss.sgi.com id ; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 05:17:45 -0800 Received: from u-71.karlsruhe.ipdial.viaginterkom.de ([62.180.19.71]:1544 "EHLO u-71.karlsruhe.ipdial.viaginterkom.de") by oss.sgi.com with ESMTP id ; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 05:17:43 -0800 Received: (ralf@lappi) by lappi.waldorf-gmbh.de id ; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 11:59:09 +0100 Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 11:59:09 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: rajesh.palani@philips.com Cc: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com, linux-mips@fnet.fr Subject: Re: sysmips syscall Message-ID: <20001118115909.D8672@bacchus.dhis.org> References: <0056910008698539000002L192*@MHS> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <0056910008698539000002L192*@MHS>; from rajesh.palani@philips.com on Fri, Nov 17, 2000 at 07:28:50PM -0600 X-Accept-Language: de,en,fr Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk Return-Path: X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips-outgoing On Fri, Nov 17, 2000 at 07:28:50PM -0600, rajesh.palani@philips.com wrote: > The following lines appear in the linuxthreads/sysdeps/mips/pt-machine.h file in version > LinuxThreads 2.1.2: > > TODO: This version makes use of MIPS ISA 2 features. It won't > work on ISA 1. These machines will have to take the overhead of > a sysmips(MIPS_ATOMIC_SET, ...) syscall which isn't implemented > yet correctly. There is however a better solution for R3000 > uniprocessor machines possible. > > My questions are: > 1. Is the sysmips syscall implemented correctly yet? Yes. > 2. What is the better solution for R3000 uniprocessor machines? You can base a spinlock implementation on the fact that the register k0 will be left at a value != zero after any exception, also including context switches. Problem: this solution breaks silently on multiproessor systems. > 3. Does anyone have a patch for LinuxThreads that supports MIPS ISA 1? glibc 2.2's pthread will do that out of the box. Ralf