From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F126EDDE2B for ; Tue, 22 May 2007 19:15:21 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: fsl booke MM vs. SMP questions From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Gabriel Paubert In-Reply-To: <20070522084645.GA12009@iram.es> References: <1179731215.32247.659.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1179741447.3660.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1179742083.32247.689.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1179747448.3660.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1179785273.32247.742.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070522084645.GA12009@iram.es> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 19:14:38 +1000 Message-Id: <1179825278.32247.827.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: ppc-dev , Dave Liu , Paul Mackerras , Kumar Gala List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > Why do you want to clear the reservation here? > > Coming out of some code path with the reservation still held > can only affect buggy code (someone doing st[dw]cx. before > l[dw]arx) AFAIK. And buggy CPUs :-) Seriously, lots of CPU implementations don't test the address for local lwarx stwcx. so if your kernel code "replaces" a reservation with another that is left set, the userland stwcx. might well succeed which is bogus. Ben.