
> > isync only affects the running processor.
> 
> I have tried LinuxPPC's TAS code but AIX's assembler complains that
> lwarx and stwcx are unsupported op. So it seems that we need to tweak
> your code actually.

The problem is, that the default on AIX is to produce architecture independent
code (arch=COM). Unfortunately not all AIX architectures seem to have these 
instructions. With arch=ppc it works (two lines adjusted .globl .tas and .tas:).
My worry is, that the Architecture book sais that the isync is necessary on SMP. 
I wonder why that would not also apply to LinuxPPC or Apple.

Andreas

Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:16:43 +0100
"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>
Re: 7.1 vs. 7.2 on AIX 5L 
"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at> writes:
> The problem is, that the default on AIX is to produce architecture
> independent code (arch=COM). Unfortunately not all AIX architectures
> seem to have these instructions.

AIX does more than one architecture?  Hmm, s_lock.h doesn't know that...

> With arch=ppc it works (two lines
> adjusted .globl .tas and .tas:).  My worry is, that the Architecture
> book sais that the isync is necessary on SMP.  I wonder why that would
> not also apply to LinuxPPC or Apple.

I doubt we've had anyone test on SMP PPC machines, other than Tatsuo's
tests on AIX.  Worse, I'd imagine that any failures from a missing sync
instruction would be rare and tough to reproduce.  So there may indeed
be a lurking problem here.

			regards, tom lane

Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:17:18 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: 7.1 vs. 7.2 on AIX 5L 