Re: [Linux-ia64] New rev 2.1 SDM for Itanium published

From: Bjorn Helgaas <>
Date: 2002-11-23 07:07:43
On Friday 22 November 2002 11:27 am, David Mosberger wrote:
> >>>>> On Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:08:39 -0800, "Jim Hull" <> said:
>   >> If so, should this be noted somewhere so that naive
>   >> people who read the manuals don't assume that it's implemented?
>   Jim> There is a new "ao" bit in CPUID[4], which as described on p. 1:32, will
>   Jim> be 1 only if the new larger atomic ops are implemented.  Do you think
>   Jim> this is insufficient?
> The ao bit seems to have gotten lost in the final version of SDM2.1.
> It's mentioned (indirectly) in the Document Revision history, but in
> the CPUID[4] description, only "branchlong" and "spontaneous deferral"
> show up.

Also, seems like the cmp8xchg16 instruction description ought to
mention that not all implementations support the instruction.
At least, that's what was done for "brl".

Bjorn Helgaas - bjorn_helgaas at
Linux and Open Source Lab
Hewlett-Packard Company
Received on Fri Nov 22 12:07:56 2002

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:11 EST