This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [anton@samba.org: [PATCH]: Bug in ppc32 ld.so]

From: Anton Blanchard <anton at samba dot org>
To: Geoff Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>
Cc: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 11:02:05 -0700
Subject: Re: [anton@samba.org: [PATCH]: Bug in ppc32 ld.so]
References: <20020715205807.GB10964@krispykreme> <200207152234.g6FMYqa26937@desire.geoffk.org> <20020715225556.GF10964@krispykreme> <200207161739.g6GHdNd27957@desire.geoffk.org>

> No, I don't agree, you haven't given any reason why ld.so should do this.

If the page is not marked guarded the cpu can instruction prefetch into the
page. Can you guarantee that current and future CPUs will never prefetch
into the icache clean area?

When I mentioned the current behaviour one of the ppc architects warned me
we were asking for trouble.

Anton

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [anton@samba.org: [PATCH]: Bug in ppc32 ld.so]
  - From: Geoff Keating

References:
- [anton@samba.org: [PATCH]: Bug in ppc32 ld.so]
  - From: Anton Blanchard
- Re: [anton@samba.org: [PATCH]: Bug in ppc32 ld.so]
  - From: Geoff Keating
- Re: [anton@samba.org: [PATCH]: Bug in ppc32 ld.so]
  - From: Anton Blanchard
- Re: [anton@samba.org: [PATCH]: Bug in ppc32 ld.so]
  - From: Geoff Keating

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]