Re: Cost of handling misaligned access

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c arch 
Sujet : Re: Cost of handling misaligned access
De : mitchalsup (at) *nospam* aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Groupes : comp.arch
Date : 03. Feb 2025, 02:43:55
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Rocksolid Light
Message-ID : <c0f6c70ca9c72202cce3721df1d81155@www.novabbs.org>
References : 1 2 3
User-Agent : Rocksolid Light
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 22:44:13 +0000, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

On 2/2/2025 10:51 AM, MitchAlsup1 wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 16:45:19 +0000, EricP wrote:
-------------
I don't think there are line straddle consequences for coherence because
there is no ordering guarantees for misaligned accesses.
>
Generally stated as:: Misaligned accesses cannot be considered ATOMIC.
>
Try it on an x86/x64. Straddle a l2 cache line and use it with a LOCK'ed
RMW. It should assert the BUS lock.
Consider this approach when you have a cabinet of slid in servers,
each server having 128 cores, the cabinet being cache coherent,
and the cabinet having 4096 cores.
Can you say "it donna scale" ??

Date Sujet#  Auteur
2 Feb 25 * Re: Cost of handling misaligned access7MitchAlsup1
2 Feb 25 +* Re: Cost of handling misaligned access5Chris M. Thomasson
3 Feb 25 i+* Re: Cost of handling misaligned access3MitchAlsup1
3 Feb 25 ii+- Re: Cost of handling misaligned access1Michael S
4 Feb 25 ii`- Re: Cost of handling misaligned access1Chris M. Thomasson
4 Feb 25 i`- Re: Cost of handling misaligned access1Chris M. Thomasson
3 Feb 25 `- Re: Cost of handling misaligned access1MitchAlsup1

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal