[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: first packages for mipsel

On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Kevin D. Kissell wrote:

> What advantage would there be to using sysmips() as opposed
> to doing the ll/sc emulation?  It seems to me that the decode path
> in the kernel would be just as fast, and there would be a single
> "ABI" for all programs - the ll/sc instructions themselves.

 It was discussed a few times already.  It's ugly and is an overkill for
UP machines -- you take at least two faults for ll/sc emulation and only a
single syscall for TAS. 

 Sysmips() is ugly as well but it's a legacy call -- I proposed
implementing _test_and_set() call which would be the underlying
implementation of the ABI _test_and_set() library call for MIPS I systems
(which should probably be the only atomic operation available to the
userland).  Unfortunately the lack of time prevents me from doing it. 

 At least _test_and_set() has well-defined semantics.  It looks
straightforward as well. 

+  Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland   +
+        e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available        +

Reply to: