...?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anybody?
Quoting Gabe Black [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hacking on this a little more, I've come across another wrinkle. The
functions which finish a timing memory access expect to get a packet
which has their data. That means that if multiple accesses are
You'd have to look at which fields of the packet actually get used
across the various ISAs... for example, Alpha store conditionals use
the extra data slot (forgot exactly what we call it) to get the bits
that say whether the SC succeeded. The CPU will have to do some
combining no matter what, so
That's fine. I wanted to bring it up since it seemed somewhat hacky like
you said.
Gabe
Steve Reinhardt wrote:
You'd have to look at which fields of the packet actually get used
across the various ISAs... for example, Alpha store conditionals use
the extra data slot (forgot exactly what we
I injured my eye the other day and had some visitors from out of
town, so I've been out of commission for the last several days. Now that
I'm mostly back in the saddle, I've started working on getting the
simple timing CPU working under x86. It's been going smoothly, but one
issue that's come
I think I must be missing something. How are x86 unaligned accesses
handled now? 1 unaligned access - 3 aligned accesses that are
combined? What chops them into piece? microcode? Some other means?
The issue is that an access could span a page boundary so half of it
could be in the TLB
In the atomic simple CPU, they're broken up across the CPU's peers
blocksize aligned boundaries by the CPU and done as x different
accesses, usually 1 or 2. There may be some weird case were it's more
than 2, but I can't think of any off the top of my head. The CPU then
composites the results into
There's also the possibility that these accesses could be atomic, right?
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 5:33 PM, Gabe Black [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the atomic simple CPU, they're broken up across the CPU's peers
blocksize aligned boundaries by the CPU and done as x different
accesses, usually 1
OK... so if we have to have the ability to lock a block in the cache
for the duration of the instruction, then how those blocks get in
there wrt TLB accesses is moot? That sounds plausible to me. Just
want to make sure that if there is an interaction that we don't design
something now that we
I still don't get what is doing the cutting into pieces? Is it done by
the CPU? or does the cpu execute two instructions to fill portions of
a register?
Ali
On Oct 27, 2008, at 6:19 PM, Gabe Black wrote:
I think so, if I'm understanding you right. I looked in the manuals,
and
in the
The CPU.
Ali Saidi wrote:
I still don't get what is doing the cutting into pieces? Is it done by
the CPU? or does the cpu execute two instructions to fill portions of
a register?
Ali
On Oct 27, 2008, at 6:19 PM, Gabe Black wrote:
I think so, if I'm understanding you right. I
Hacking on this a little more, I've come across another wrinkle. The
functions which finish a timing memory access expect to get a packet
which has their data. That means that if multiple accesses are required,
the CPU will have to take all the packets it gets as responses and build
a larger
11 matches
Mail list logo
