atom feed16 messages in org.freebsd.freebsd-smpRe: Matt's new unlock optimiazation
FromSent OnAttachments
Tommy HallgrenNov 23, 1999 5:39 am 
Peter WemmNov 23, 1999 6:01 am 
Poul-Henning KampNov 23, 1999 6:09 am 
Matthew DillonNov 23, 1999 9:02 am 
Matthew DillonNov 23, 1999 9:51 am 
Matthew DillonNov 23, 1999 10:18 am 
Matthew DillonNov 23, 1999 10:23 am 
Matthew DillonNov 23, 1999 10:23 am 
Alan CoxNov 23, 1999 10:38 am 
Matthew DillonNov 23, 1999 11:00 am 
Matthew DillonNov 23, 1999 11:41 am 
Matthew DillonNov 23, 1999 11:50 am 
Alfred PerlsteinNov 23, 1999 12:01 pm 
Alan CoxNov 23, 1999 12:22 pm 
Alan CoxNov 23, 1999 12:52 pm 
Alfred PerlsteinNov 23, 1999 1:09 pm 
Subject:Re: Matt's new unlock optimiazation
From:Alfred Perlstein (bri@wintelcom.net)
Date:Nov 23, 1999 1:09:22 pm
List:org.freebsd.freebsd-smp

On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Alan Cox wrote:

I would *strongly* recommend that everyone interested in low-level SMP issues read http://rsim.cs.uiuc.edu/~sadve/Publications/models_tutorial.ps. This is a tutorial on memory consistency models (with lots of examples) from IEEE Computer.

The Intel note that Matt referred to describes a lot of detail about the model implemented by the x86, but in the end says, for all practical purposes, you should treat the x86 as though it implements processor-ordering (or processor consistency). The tutorial explains precisely what this means to you as a programmer.

I've been reading the SPARC Arch manual for a long time, especially the sections on 'memory models'. I just had no idea that intel implemented these type of optimizations and thought that it always followed the strong memory model (TSO). oops? :)

Thank you for the reference I'll be sure to read it throughly before touching any of the asm or consider myself viable as a reviewer for such changes.

thanks, -Alfred

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message