From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:50:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:60645 "EHLO dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S28588926AbYAVPuA (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:50:00 +0000 Received: from denk.linux-mips.net (denk.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m0MFnxI8030923; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:49:59 GMT Received: (from ralf@localhost) by denk.linux-mips.net (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id m0MFnwnm030922; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:49:58 GMT Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:49:58 +0000 From: Ralf Baechle To: Kumba Cc: Thomas Bogendoerfer , Florian Lohoff , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, debian-mips@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Tester with IP27/IP30 needed Message-ID: <20080122154958.GA29108@linux-mips.org> References: <20080115112420.GA7347@alpha.franken.de> <20080115112719.GB7920@paradigm.rfc822.org> <20080117004054.GA12051@alpha.franken.de> <479609A6.2020204@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <479609A6.2020204@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) 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: 18110 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 Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 10:20:06AM -0500, Kumba wrote: > No effect on Octane R14000A, as far as lockups. Spikes the CPU usage in 'ps > aux', but that's about it. So far it seems R12000 and R14000 are unaffected. > If I can get my plucky IP32 R10K to boot again soon, I may try it there for > kicks and giggles. Maybe we're also seeing a side effect of the R10K's spec > exec knocking the non-cache-coherent machines out? > > Also, tried building the code with the R10K cache barrier on to see if anything > else changes? Generally reserved for kernel stuff, but Peter once speculated > userland might have a use for it. It's a cache instruction so priviledged which means userspace can't execute it. It's also entirely unclear if a cache barrier instruction would make a difference at all. Ralf