On Mon, 2015-09-28 at 08:58 +0000, David Laight wrote:

From: Rafael J. Wysocki

quoted

Sent: 27 September 2015 15:09

...

quoted

quoted

quoted

Say you have three adjacent fields in a structure, x, y, z, each one byte long.
Initially, all of them are equal to 0.

CPU A writes 1 to x and CPU B writes 2 to y at the same time.

What's the result?

I think every CPU's  cache architecure guarantees adjacent store
integrity, even in the face of SMP, so it's x==1 and y==2.  If you're
thinking of old alpha SMP system where the lowest store width is 32 bits
and thus you have to do RMW to update a byte, this was usually fixed by
padding (assuming the structure is not packed).  However, it was such a
problem that even the later alpha chips had byte extensions.

Does linux still support those old Alphas?

The x86 cpus will also do 32bit wide rmw cycles for the 'bit' operations.

That's different: it's an atomic RMW operation.  The problem with the
alpha was that the operation wasn't atomic (meaning that it can't be
interrupted and no intermediate output states are visible).

quoted

OK, thanks!

You still have to ensure the compiler doesn't do wider rmw cycles.
I believe the recent versions of gcc won't do wider accesses for volatile data.

I don't understand this comment.  You seem to be implying gcc would do a
64 bit RMW for a 32 bit store ... that would be daft when a single
instruction exists to perform the operation on all architectures.

James


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html