Hi Peter,
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:47 PM, Peter Gavin <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Stefan Kristiansson
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> - The granularity of the link is a word.
>> (I'm certainly open for discussions on this one, e.g. a cacheline could
>> make
>> sense too)
>
>
> I think a single word is fine. Doing the whole cacheline would be more
> complex, wouldn't it? Plus if the whole cache line was linked it would mean
Why would it be more complex? Snooping the bus is done at the cacheline
level, right?
> code that uses atomic instructions needs to know the cache line size, which
> might be annoying.
IIRC, on PPC it applies to the whole cacheline.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
_______________________________________________
OpenRISC mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openrisc.net/listinfo/openrisc
