Erik Trulsson wrote:
> > The Athlon rewriting same value to cacheable memory under the knees of
> > programmers looks a severe issue to me if it is true. Not only AGP memory
> > can be affected. What about SMP, MMIO (if some cacheable mapping exists),
> > etc...?
> I am not familiar with the acronym MMIO is so I can't comment on that.

"Memory Mapped I/O".  8-).

> In general though, having memoryspace used for memory-mapped I/O
> devices (including AGP) marked as cacheable is a bad idea unless you
> are very careful and know exactly what you are doing.

"What he said".  8-) 8-).

> For SMP it shouldn't be any problem. Multi-CPU systems normally
> run some cache-coherence protocol between themselves to make sure that
> things like this is not a problem.

I think the problem is pages in which there are inter-CPU
locks being set and cleared.  Say you had a speculative
write that would clear a lock, only you decide not to clear
it because it doesn't happen.

> > In my opinion, OSes having some cacheable mapping to AGP memory is not the
> > real problem. Just it has revealed the AMD issue.
> It might be argued that there should be some cache-coherence protocol
> between the CPU and the AGP device.

This is what Bruce and Peter suggested; Peter said that he was
working on a rewrite of the pmap code and would look in that

> Not knowing how AGP is specified I don't know if this interaction
> between the CPU and AGP is a bug or just working as specified.  I
> suspect it is the latter though.

"If it doesn't have to be correct, I can make it as fast as you

"The CPU is so fast, it can execute an infinite loop is 6 seconds!"

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to