From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Received: from n23.mail01.mtsvc.net (mailout32.mail01.mtsvc.net [216.70.64.70])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 632681A00FA
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Fri,  5 Sep 2014 10:59:43 +1000 (EST)
Message-ID: <54090AF4.7060406@hurleysoftware.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 20:59:32 -0400
From: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
 David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
Subject: Re: bit fields && data tearing
References: <20140712181328.GA8738@redhat.com>	
 <54079B70.4050200@hurleysoftware.com> <1409785893.30640.118.camel@pasglop>	
 <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D17487172@AcuExch.aculab.com>
 <1409824374.4246.62.camel@pasglop> <5408E458.3@zytor.com>
In-Reply-To: <5408E458.3@zytor.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
 "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
 Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
 "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
 "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
 Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
 "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
 "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
 Miroslav Franc <mfranc@redhat.com>, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

[ +cc linux-alpha ]

On 09/04/2014 06:14 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 09/04/2014 02:52 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>
>> Yeah correct, alpha and bytes right ? Is there any other ? That's why I
>> suggested int.
>>
> 
> Even for Alpha it is only the 21064 AFAIK.

For -mcpu=ev5 (21164) and the following test

struct x {
	long a;
	char b;
	char c;
	char d;
	char e;
};

void store_b(struct x *p) {
	p->b = 1;
}

gcc generates:

void store_b(struct x *p) {
   0:	08 00 30 a0 	ldl	t0,8(a0)
   4:	01 f1 3f 44 	andnot	t0,0xff,t0
   8:	01 34 20 44 	or	t0,0x1,t0
   c:	08 00 30 b0 	stl	t0,8(a0)
  10:	01 80 fa 6b 	ret

IOW, rmw on 3 adjacent bytes, which is bad :)
For -mcpu=ev56 (21164A), the generated code is:

void store_b(struct x *p) {
   0:	01 00 3f 20 	lda	t0,1
   4:	08 00 30 38 	stb	t0,8(a0)
   8:	01 80 fa 6b 	ret

which is ok.
I have no idea how prevalent the ev56 is compared to the ev5.
Still we're talking about a chip that came out in 1996.

I still hate split caches though.

Regards,
Peter Hurley