On 03.05.2012 18:34, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Alex Deucher
> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian K?nig
>>> wrote:
On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> On Mit, 2012-05-02 at
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Alex Deucher
>>> wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse
wrote:
>>>
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Alex Deucher
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse
>>> wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian K?nig >>> vodafo
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Alex Deucher
> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian K?nig >> vodafone.de> wrote:
On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel D?nzer wrote:
>
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu,
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian König
wrote:
>
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian König
>>> wrote:
On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>
> On Mit
On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> On Mit, 2012-05-02 at 16:20 -0400, j.glisse at gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Jerome Glisse
>>
>> This convert fence to use uint64_t sequence number intention is
>> to use the fact that uin64_t is big enough that we don't need to
>> care about wrap around.
>>
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian K?nig
>> wrote:
>>> On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel D?nzer wrote:
On Mit, 2012-05-02 at 16:20 -0400, j.glisse at gmail.com wrote:
>
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian K?nig
> wrote:
>> On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel D?nzer wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mit, 2012-05-02 at 16:20 -0400, j.glisse at gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse
This convert fence to use
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian K?nig
wrote:
> On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel D?nzer wrote:
>>
>> On Mit, 2012-05-02 at 16:20 -0400, j.glisse at gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Jerome Glisse
>>>
>>> This convert fence to use uint64_t sequence number intention is
>>> to use the fact that uin
On 03.05.2012 18:34, Jerome Glisse wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian König wrote:
On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Mit, 2012-05-02 at 16:20 -0400, j.gli...@
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian König
>> wrote:
>>> On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Mit, 2012-05-02 at 16:20 -0400, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian König
> wrote:
>> On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mit, 2012-05-02 at 16:20 -0400, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse
This convert fence to use uin
On Mit, 2012-05-02 at 16:20 -0400, j.glisse at gmail.com wrote:
> From: Jerome Glisse
>
> This convert fence to use uint64_t sequence number intention is
> to use the fact that uin64_t is big enough that we don't need to
> care about wrap around.
>
> Tested with and without writeback using 0xFF
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Christian König wrote:
> On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>>
>> On Mit, 2012-05-02 at 16:20 -0400, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Jerome Glisse
>>>
>>> This convert fence to use uint64_t sequence number intention is
>>> to use the fact that uin64_t
On 03.05.2012 09:21, Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Mit, 2012-05-02 at 16:20 -0400, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse
This convert fence to use uint64_t sequence number intention is
to use the fact that uin64_t is big enough that we don't need to
care about wrap around.
Tested with and wi
On Mit, 2012-05-02 at 16:20 -0400, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Jerome Glisse
>
> This convert fence to use uint64_t sequence number intention is
> to use the fact that uin64_t is big enough that we don't need to
> care about wrap around.
>
> Tested with and without writeback using 0xF
From: Jerome Glisse
This convert fence to use uint64_t sequence number intention is
to use the fact that uin64_t is big enough that we don't need to
care about wrap around.
Tested with and without writeback using 0xF000 as initial
fence sequence and thus allowing to test the wrap around from
From: Jerome Glisse
This convert fence to use uint64_t sequence number intention is
to use the fact that uin64_t is big enough that we don't need to
care about wrap around.
Tested with and without writeback using 0xF000 as initial
fence sequence and thus allowing to test the wrap around from
20 matches
Mail list logo