This is the mail archive of the java@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Using __kuser_cmpxchg


On Fri, 16 Nov 2007, Paul Brook wrote:

> > > > On a pre-ARMv6 processor
> > >
> > > Similar "spurious" failures can happen on ARMv6 processors.
> > >
> > > ARMv6 cpus don't have atomic operations either. They have ldrex/strex,
> > > where the latter will fail if another CPU modifies the memory *or* a
> > > context switch occurs.
> >
> > Due to the current implementation this is indeed true.
> >
> > ARMv6 is more trivial to fix though, since the operation can be
> > reattempted whenever the strex fails.
> 
> I'm confused. Why is this any different to ARMv5? AFAICS the two kuser_cmpxchg 
> implementations are functionally equivalent.

Yes they are.  My point is that fixing the ARMv6 one to eliminate the 
false negative is almost trivial.  The pre-ARMv6 is not so trivial 
though.  And I don't want to change the interface of course.

I implemented a fix here but I still want to think it through so not to 
miss some implications wrt page faults for example.


Nicolas


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]