Re: mips32_flush_cache routine corrupts CP0_STATUS with gcc-2.96

["Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>]

On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Gleb O. Raiko wrote:

> Have to check the cacheline at given address again. D-cache may have the
> valid bit set for the cacheline at the same address. Address means
> location in a cache, not memory. Check at address requires one extra
> tick as opposed to checking the bit.

 Well, you issue an instruction word read from the cache.  The answer is
either a hit, providing a word at the data bus at the same time (so you
can't get a hit from one cache and data from the other) or a miss with no
valid data -- you have to stall in this case, waiting for a refill.  Then
when data from the main memory arrives, it is latched in the cache (it
doesn't really matter, which one now -- if it's the wrong one, then
another refill will happen next time the memory address is dereferenced)
and provided to the CPU at the same time. 

> Please, note that CPU isn't a monolitic program, but rather a set of
> functional blocks, so "proper implementation" may require additional
> signals on wires and delays.

 Some kind of synchronization is needed as everywhere in the CPU, as it's
mostly a synchronous circuit.  As long as the state at clock edges is
consistent, there is no problem with cache swapping.  That's what I mean
by a "proper implementation".

-- 
+  Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland   +
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
+        e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available        +