Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: MM instruction and the pipeline
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 21:14:37 +0000
Organization: Rocksolid Light
Message-ID: <bf46a508f4e6bbe44846078a50af63b7@www.novabbs.org>
References: <venkii$23b6b$1@dont-email.me> <vep8rb$2d8ru$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2347662"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="o5SwNDfMfYu6Mv4wwLiW6e/jbA93UAdzFodw5PEa6eU";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Posting-User: cb29269328a20fe5719ed6a1c397e21f651bda71
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$3srWvQsX0rBwJ5ZRTWAwBOGzSWQ1bZexWzKvUsoNXslIhGaFoGyy2
Bytes: 2753
Lines: 39

On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 20:48:39 +0000, Paul A. Clayton wrote:

>
> Here is a question that I will leave to Mitch:
>
> Can a MM that has confirmed permissions commit before it has been
> performed such that uncorrectable errors would be recognized not
> on read of the source but on later read of the destination?

A Memory Move does not <necessarily> read the destination. In
order to make the data transfers occur in cache line sizes,
The first and the last line may be read, but the intermediate
ones are not read (from DRAM) only to be re-written. An
implementation with byte write enables might not read any
of the destination lines.

Then there is the issue with uncorrectable errors at the
receiving cache. The current protocol has the sender (core)
not release his write buffer until LLC has replied that
the data arrived without ECC trouble. Thus, the instruction
causing the latent uncorrectable error is not retired until
the data has arrived successfully at LLC.

> I could see some wanting to depend on the copy checking data
> validity synchronously, but some might be okay with a quasi-
> synchronous copy that allows the processor to continue doing work
> outside of the MM.

As I mentioned before, Yes I intend to allow other instructions
to operate concurrently with MM, but I also expect MM to consume
all of L1 cache bandwidth. Just like LD L1-L2-miss operates
concurrently with FDIV.

> If a translation map is provided for coherence, any MM could
> commit once it is not speculative but before the actual copy has
> been performed. Tracking what parts have been completed in the
> presence of other stores would have significant overhead.

In practice, one is not going to allow MM to get farther than
the miss buffer ahead of a mispredict shadow.