From: Richard Curnow <Richard.Curnow@superh.com>
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Virtual alias cache coherency results (was: x86, ARM, PARISC, PPC, MIPS and Sparc folks please run this)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 11:17:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030911101704.GA24978@malvern.uk.w2k.superh.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030910210416.GA24258@mail.jlokier.co.uk>
Hi Jamie,
Thanks for posting the summary of your experiment - very useful!
* Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> [2003-09-10]:
>
> Validity of SHMLBA value
> ........................
>
> Many CPUs offer virtual cache coherency when the aliases are separated
> by a certain CPU-dependent multiple. In principle, all
> Linux-supported architectures _should_ have a multiple which makes
> virtual aliases coherent, because it's defined in the API as "SHMLBA".
> However, on some specific CPUs, no coherent multiple was found.
>
> Valid kernel SHMLBA: Sparc, PA-RISC, MIPS
> (plus all the coherent architectures)
> SHMLBA not valid: ARM, m68k
> SHMLBA not defined: SH
What's the basis for deciding wheter SHMLBA is defined or not? There are
definitions of SHMLBA in include/asm-sh/shmparam.h and
include/asm-sh64/shmparam.h for the kernel. The sh64 /usr/include/asm
headers have effectively the same thing (not identical because the copy
I'm looking at hasn't been synced with the latest kernel sources), and I
assume the sh userland is OK too (haven't checked though).
In both cases the kernel headers are showing correct and useful values :
16k for SH-4 in the sh file (16k direct-mapped, or 32k 2-way associative
on latest devices), 8k for SH-5 in the sh64 file (32k 4-way
associative).
Cheers
Richard
--
Richard \\\ SuperH Core+Debug Architect /// .. At home ..
P. /// richard.curnow@superh.com /// rc@rc0.org.uk
Curnow \\\ http://www.superh.com/ /// www.rc0.org.uk
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-09-11 10:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-09-10 21:04 Jamie Lokier
2003-09-10 22:39 ` Russell King
2003-09-10 23:37 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-09-11 0:07 ` Russell King
2003-09-11 12:35 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-09-11 15:09 ` Russell King
2003-09-11 16:25 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-09-11 16:52 ` Russell King
2003-09-11 18:55 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-09-12 0:45 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-09-12 7:48 ` Russell King
2003-09-11 18:51 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2003-09-11 10:17 ` Richard Curnow [this message]
2003-09-11 16:34 ` Jamie Lokier
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=20030911101704.GA24978@malvern.uk.w2k.superh.com \
--to=richard.curnow@superh.com \
--cc=jamie@shareable.org \
--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®