Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<vh0klc$1qc98$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Arm ldaxr / stxr loop question Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 14:25:48 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 24 Message-ID: <vh0klc$1qc98$1@dont-email.me> References: <vfono1$14l9r$1@dont-email.me> <YROdnVIXfKmwYrn6nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@supernews.com> <vg5tf7$3tqmi$2@dont-email.me> <vgm0g1$3c2t2$3@dont-email.me> <zwwXO.842112$_o_3.379966@fx17.iad> <vgm4vj$3d2as$1@dont-email.me> <vgm5cb$3d2as$3@dont-email.me> <OnzXO.657386$1m96.281665@fx15.iad> <TfKXO.658488$1m96.146506@fx15.iad> <T99YO.79275$MoU3.7336@fx36.iad> <db6fdf85752c2b86affc911a98f1798b@www.novabbs.org> <_4oYO.862335$_o_3.103294@fx17.iad> <vgt5vc$11ikg$1@dont-email.me> <vgtud7$16bjd$2@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 23:25:48 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2ffdf1eeb6f7861b52a3305ad94407ae"; logging-data="1913128"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19ra7TItBxZSnJU+dQcInh0wunIUVA+23o=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:/lYff3WOiX3LIdQ4713A9wTkOSs= In-Reply-To: <vgtud7$16bjd$2@dont-email.me> Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 2483 On 11/11/2024 1:53 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 11/11/2024 6:56 AM, jseigh wrote: >> On 11/11/24 08:59, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> >>> >>> There are fully atomic instructions, the load/store exclusives are >>> generally there for backward compatability with armv7; the full set >>> of atomics (SWP, CAS, Atomic Arithmetic Ops, etc) arrived with >>> ARMv8.1. >>> >> >> They added the atomics for scalability allegedly. ARM never >> stated what the actual issue was. I suspect they couldn't >> guarantee a memory lock size small enough to eliminate >> destructive interference. Like cache line size instead >> of word size. > > For some reason it reminds me of the size of a reservation granule wrt > LL/SC. For some reason I remember way back wrt having to pad and align things on reservation granule's back on PPC. Iirc, it was the "anchor" structure. The nodes were aligned and padded up to l2 cache lines. This was 20+ years ago! damn it. Time goes by. Uggg. ;^o