linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gabriel Paubert <paubert@iram.es>
To: Matt Sealey <matt@genesi-usa.com>
Cc: ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: "atomic" 64-bit math on 32-bit ppc's?
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 18:02:06 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070904160206.GA12698@iram.es> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46DD500B.4020207@genesi-usa.com>

On Tue, Sep 04, 2007 at 01:31:07PM +0100, Matt Sealey wrote:
> 
> Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 04, 2007 at 12:09:22PM +0100, Matt Sealey wrote:
> >>Hi guys,
> >>
> >>The Solaris PPC code drop included most of these functions for 32-bit ops 
> >>on
> >>32-bit PPC architectures but the 64-bit operations are not present. What I
> >>a not clear on is the operation of lwarx and stwcx. and if they will work 
> >>if
> >>you are doing operations on two words at a time.
> >
> >No. There is a single reservation for a single word.
> 
> This is what I gathered from the programming environments manual at least.

Well, that's because it is fundamentally impossible to 
have more than one, what would the hardware do if the second
update fails after the first has succeeded?

> 
> >the 64 bit operations inside a spinlock on PPC32, and then select the
> >number /location of spinlock(s) based on your needs, from one global
> >per machine to one per 64 bit variable if you find excessive contention.
> 
> Okay that makes sense, but it would have to be a super global big lock,
> I don't think the code is there in ZFS to give every 64-bit variable it's
> own dedicated spinlock (kind of an overhaul) and I'm trying to be fast..

I don't know at all the ZFS code, not any filesystem code for the
matter. But how many spinlocks would you have to take and release 
per actual disk operation?

	Regards,
	Gabriel

  reply	other threads:[~2007-09-04 16:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-09-04 11:09 "atomic" 64-bit math on 32-bit ppc's? Matt Sealey
2007-09-04 11:39 ` Gabriel Paubert
2007-09-04 12:31   ` Matt Sealey
2007-09-04 16:02     ` Gabriel Paubert [this message]
2007-09-04 17:40       ` Matt Sealey
2007-09-05  1:04     ` David Gibson
2007-09-04 18:48   ` Scott Wood
2007-09-06 13:21     ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-09-06 13:43       ` Scott Wood
2007-09-06 14:09         ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-09-10 20:39           ` Jon Loeliger

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070904160206.GA12698@iram.es \
    --to=paubert@iram.es \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=matt@genesi-usa.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).