🚀 go-pugleaf

| >What are the circumstances where one has to use non-cacheable memory locations for any
| >"meaningful" (meaningful being more than just the producer/consumer relationship)
| >synchronization, given that LL/SC works only with cacheable locations?
| 
| What if you had a non-cacheable, shared memory on the system bus.  It is
| possible to make a shared memory that links multiple systems to a single
| coherent memory image.  Not all the processors sharing the memory would
| be on a single chassis.

Let's not get confused with the mechanisms for synchronization and the mechanisms for 
cache coherency - two are not the same.  All copies of a synchronization variable
(ie. the location used to achieve some form of synchronization) must be kept consistent
at all times, whereas all copies of a shared location not used for synchronization
may be kept consistent "only when necessary."  The less efficient it is to notify a
change of shared data to all its copies, less often a system SHOULD try to maintain
consistency.  Unfortunately, most shared memory multiprocessors do not distinguish between
synchronization variables and shared data, and apply the same consistency rules to both.

| 
| If you had a bus that depended on snooping/snarfing to maintain the
| cache-coherence, you would have to mark this shared memory as non-cacheable.
| (It can be modified without a local bus access being generated, so there
| is nothing to snoop/snarf.)

Have you heard of "shared" bit (circa 1985 or earlier)?

S. Peter Song - 29K Advanced Processor Development - Advanced Micro Devices
peter@nucleus.amd.com                                (800) 531-5202 x54818