From: Justin Carlson <justincarlson@cmu.edu>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: multithreading on a multiprocessor system ( a bit OT )
Date: 16 Jan 2002 15:16:44 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1011212204.314.3.camel@gs256.sp.cs.cmu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C45D95C.7000402@student.uni-kl.de>
In-Reply-To: <3C45D95C.7000402@student.uni-kl.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1351 bytes --]
On Wed, 2002-01-16 at 14:49, R. Sinoradzki wrote:
> O.K my question:
> Consider two modern processors that share some data and a lock.
> The lock may be implemented with something like an atomic test-and-set
> instruction. Now processor 'A' acquires the lock and works with the data.
> Processor 'B' also wants to access the data, but internally reorders it's
> instructions because the instructions seem independent from each other.
> So 'B' might access the data without having the lock.
> If it's a single processor system, reordering instructions in a way that
> ensures that it looks 'as if' everything has been executed in the right order
> might be easy, but in a multiprocessor system 'A' doesn't know 'B's state.
Then you've got a bug. Modern implementations that do SMP provide some
way of placing barriers around speculative execution structures to make
sure you don't, say, go out and read some memory location that changes
state in a device because that's an OK speculative action to take.
Can't really comment on x86, as I'm not very good with it, but taking
for example MIPS and Alpha, in addition to the ll-sc ops, there are a
sync and mb instructions, respectively, which provide a method for
assuring that previous operations have become visible in terms of
general machine state before going on.
-Justin
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-01-16 20:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-01-16 19:49 R. Sinoradzki
2002-01-16 20:16 ` Justin Carlson [this message]
2002-01-16 21:33 ` R. Sinoradzki
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=1011212204.314.3.camel@gs256.sp.cs.cmu.edu \
--to=justincarlson@cmu.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®