Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c arch 
Sujet : Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later
De : already5chosen (at) *nospam* yahoo.com (Michael S)
Groupes : comp.arch
Date : 02. Aug 2024, 11:31:26
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <20240802123126.00002fc3@yahoo.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
User-Agent : Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.34; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:40:33 +0000
mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) wrote:

On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 20:34:28 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:
 
mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) writes: 
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:39:24 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:
 
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes: 
BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> writes: 
Some amount of the cases where consistency issues have come up
in my case have do do with RAM-backed hardware devices, like the
rasterizer module. It has its own internal caches that need to
be flushed, and not flushing caches (between this module and
CPU) when trying to "transfer" control over things like the
framebuffer or Z-buffer, can result in obvious graphical issues
(and, texture-corruption doesn't necessarily look good either). 
>
The approach taken on AMD64 CPUs is to have different memory types
(and associated memory type range registers).  Plain DRAM is
write-back cached, but there is also write-through and uncacheable
memory.  For a frame buffer that is read by some hardware that can
access the memory independently, write-through seems to be the
way to go. 
>
In addition, ARM64 CPUs include allocation hints in
the memory type such as 'read allocate', 'transient read
allocate', 'write allocate' as well has having optionally
multiple coherency domains (inner and outer sharable). 
>
Sorry, I don't understand the word 'allocate' ?!? 
>
"allocate a cache line".
>
Example would be a DMA request with the 'read allocate' hint
is allowed to be allocated in LLC instead of being stored in
DRAM.
>
Used when software expects the DMA data to be immediately. 
 
Thanks for the explanation.
 
In my case LLC is simply the front end for DRAM so a device
write will spew data into LLC where it will wait to be written.
Meanwhile, cores (or other devices) can access it directly
from LLC as if it were from DRAM except at lower latency.
>

Sounds like memory-side cache. Intel Broadwell and few Skylake
models with Iris Pro 580 GPU had 128MB of eDRAM cache operating in
that manner.

It is usefull in many applications, esp. bandwidth constrained, but not
in OLTP or similar enterprise apps on multi-socket SMP hardware.

BTW, what do you plan to do when a single die has multiple independent
memory channels/controllers? Is your LLC statically split beween
channels or shared?










Date Sujet#  Auteur
24 Jul 24 * Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later63MitchAlsup1
25 Jul 24 `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later62BGB
25 Jul 24  +* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later57Chris M. Thomasson
26 Jul 24  i`* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later56Anton Ertl
26 Jul 24  i +* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later20BGB
29 Jul 24  i i`* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later19Anton Ertl
29 Jul 24  i i +* Intel overvoltage (was: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later)2Thomas Koenig
29 Jul 24  i i i`- Re: Intel overvoltage1BGB
29 Jul 24  i i `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later16BGB
30 Jul 24  i i  `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later15Anton Ertl
30 Jul 24  i i   `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later14BGB
30 Jul 24  i i    +* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later2Chris M. Thomasson
31 Jul 24  i i    i`- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1BGB
1 Aug 24  i i    `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later11Anton Ertl
1 Aug 24  i i     +- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1Michael S
1 Aug 24  i i     +* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later8MitchAlsup1
1 Aug 24  i i     i+- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1Michael S
2 Aug 24  i i     i`* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later6MitchAlsup1
2 Aug 24  i i     i +- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1Michael S
4 Aug 24  i i     i `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later4MitchAlsup1
5 Aug 24  i i     i  `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later3Stephen Fuld
5 Aug 24  i i     i   `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later2Stephen Fuld
5 Aug 24  i i     i    `- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1MitchAlsup1
1 Aug 24  i i     `- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1BGB
26 Jul 24  i +* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later20MitchAlsup1
27 Jul 24  i i+- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1BGB
29 Jul 24  i i`* Memory ordering (was: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later)18Anton Ertl
29 Jul 24  i i +* Re: Memory ordering15MitchAlsup1
29 Jul 24  i i i+* Re: Memory ordering6Chris M. Thomasson
29 Jul 24  i i ii`* Re: Memory ordering5MitchAlsup1
30 Jul 24  i i ii `* Re: Memory ordering4Michael S
31 Jul 24  i i ii  `* Re: Memory ordering3Chris M. Thomasson
31 Jul 24  i i ii   `* Re: Memory ordering2Chris M. Thomasson
31 Jul 24  i i ii    `- Re: Memory ordering1Chris M. Thomasson
30 Jul 24  i i i`* Re: Memory ordering8Anton Ertl
30 Jul 24  i i i +* Re: Memory ordering2Chris M. Thomasson
30 Jul 24  i i i i`- Re: Memory ordering1Chris M. Thomasson
31 Jul 24  i i i `* Re: Memory ordering5MitchAlsup1
31 Jul 24  i i i  +- Re: Memory ordering1Chris M. Thomasson
1 Aug 24  i i i  `* Re: Memory ordering3Anton Ertl
1 Aug 24  i i i   `* Re: Memory ordering2MitchAlsup1
2 Aug 24  i i i    `- Re: Memory ordering1Anton Ertl
29 Jul 24  i i `* Re: Memory ordering2Chris M. Thomasson
30 Jul 24  i i  `- Re: Memory ordering1Chris M. Thomasson
29 Jul 24  i +* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later13Chris M. Thomasson
29 Jul 24  i i+* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later9BGB
29 Jul 24  i ii`* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later8Chris M. Thomasson
29 Jul 24  i ii +- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1Chris M. Thomasson
29 Jul 24  i ii +* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later2BGB
29 Jul 24  i ii i`- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1Chris M. Thomasson
30 Jul 24  i ii `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later4jseigh
30 Jul 24  i ii  `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later3Chris M. Thomasson
31 Jul 24  i ii   `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later2jseigh
31 Jul 24  i ii    `- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1Chris M. Thomasson
29 Jul 24  i i+- Memory ordering (was: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later)1Anton Ertl
29 Jul 24  i i`* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later2MitchAlsup1
29 Jul 24  i i `- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1BGB
6 Aug 24  i `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later2Chris M. Thomasson
6 Aug 24  i  `- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1Chris M. Thomasson
26 Jul 24  `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later4MitchAlsup1
27 Jul 24   +- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1BGB
28 Jul 24   `* Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later2Paul A. Clayton
28 Jul 24    `- Re: Arguments for a sane ISA 6-years later1MitchAlsup1

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal