On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 09:40:34AM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> In the off chance that someone actually does an SMP 44x, I think the hint bit
>> here would just be ignored (I could test possibly if we want to verify).
>> However, I thought the FSL parts didn't like toggling the reserved bits and
>>
On Feb 9, 2010, at 9:19 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 01:50:11PM +1100, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>>
>> Recent versions of the PowerPC architecture added a hint bit to the larx
>> instructions to differentiate between an atomic operation and a lock
>> operation:
>>
>>> 0 Other p
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 01:50:11PM +1100, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>
>Recent versions of the PowerPC architecture added a hint bit to the larx
>instructions to differentiate between an atomic operation and a lock operation:
>
>> 0 Other programs might attempt to modify the word in storage addressed b
Recent versions of the PowerPC architecture added a hint bit to the larx
instructions to differentiate between an atomic operation and a lock operation:
> 0 Other programs might attempt to modify the word in storage addressed by EA
> even if the subsequent Store Conditional succeeds.
>
> 1 Other
