From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:27:19 +0100 (BST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:63450 "EHLO dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20038533AbWIYO1S (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:27:18 +0100 Received: from denk.linux-mips.net (denk.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id k8PES73F023497; Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:28:07 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by denk.linux-mips.net (8.13.7/8.13.7/Submit) id k8PES6xD023496; Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:28:06 +0100 Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:28:06 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: Sergei Shtylyov Cc: Yoichi Yuasa , linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] fixed mtc0_tlbw_hazard Message-ID: <20060925142805.GF20048@linux-mips.org> References: <20060922010713.657f2861.yoichi_yuasa@tripeaks.co.jp> <4512BC2A.6040003@dev.rtsoft.ru> <20060922014142.2a1985c1.yoichi_yuasa@tripeaks.co.jp> <4512C55A.6070206@ru.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4512C55A.6070206@ru.mvista.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 12654 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 09:01:14PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > I fail to see what was changed WRT SB1 CPUs by the suspected patch. > Though wait... the previous version was inconsistent, using the different > barrier definitions for C and assembly (nops in the former, and branch in > the latter). But since the assembly version was not really used, it > couldn't break anything... :-/ > > Anyway, shouldn't ssnop's be used for SB1 instead? CPU has quad-issue > pipeline, hasn't it? SB1 is almost fully interlocked so the right thing to do is doing nothing. Ralf