Re: MIPS atomic memory operations (A.K.A PR 33479).

[David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>]

Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, David Daney wrote:
>
> > Currently, I (and thus GCC 4.3) am assuming that Linux emulates 'll', 'sc' and
> > 'sync', If sync is not emulated, we would need to adjust the code generation
> > so that it is not emitted on ISAs that don't support it.
>
>  While adding "sync" is trivial enough I may have a patch ready by 
> tomorrow, that will not change the existing userbase and I am not entirely 
> sure forcing such a hasty upgrade on people would be reasonable; likely 
> not.
>
> > > A workaround for a CPU erratum fits within the "-mfix-*" option family quite
> > > well though.
> > Do we know which CPUs require branch-likely?
>
>  The R10000; there is a note about it in <asm-mips/war.h> at 
> R10000_LLSC_WAR.
>
> > I would be inclined to agree with adding a "-mfix-??" option.
> >
> > The only place where GCC's __sync_* primitives are generated without
> > explicitly writing them into your program is in GCJ compiled java code that
> > uses volatile fields.
> >
> > If we expect the use of the __sync_* primitives on CPUs that require
> > branch-likely to be rare, we shouldn't penalize those trying to rid themselves
> > of the beasts.
>
>  Another option is to depend on the setting of -mbranch-likely.  By 
> default it is on only for the processors which implement it and do not 
> discourage it, i.e. these of the MIPS II, MIPS III and MIPS IV ISAs.

This seems to be the most sensible option.

I will try to work up the GCC patch tonight.

Thanks,
David Daney