Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch > #118700

Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg

From cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross)
Newsgroups comp.arch
Subject Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg
Date 2026-10-18 17:59 +0000
Organization PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID <11b31ef$qiv$1@reader2.panix.com> (permalink)
References <2026Oct13.104347@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <11b0bd3$b5b$1@reader2.panix.com> <1792265982-5857@newsgrouper.org> <2026Oct18.170823@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>

Show all headers | View raw

In article <2026Oct18.170823@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>,
Anton Ertl <anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> writes:
>>cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) posted:
>>> What I'm saying is that, as written, the bits in the `LOCK`
>>> description above _could_ be interpreted to mean that _any_
>>> `XCHG` will always assert the `LOCK#` signal, including an
>>> `XCHG` that does not touch memory at all.  The "Why?" was
>>> rhetorical, as in, "Why would the system do that?"  For example,
>>> if one wrote, `xchg %ecx, %eax`, why should that assert `LOCK#`?
>>> Truly I don't know, and I was just speculating.
>>
>>Writing high quality documentation is fundamentally hard.
>
>I don't think that's the issue here.  They just did not limit the
>sentence "The XCHG instruction always asserts the LOCK# signal
>regardless of the presence or absence of the LOCK prefix."  to XCHG
>instructions with memory operands.  That would be easy to fix, but
>they did not.  And Chris M. Thomasson understood it as including
>XCHG reg, reg.
>
>My guess is that it is easy to fix in principle, but you have to deal
>with all kinds of red tape for such a fix, so unless there is good
>reason, you don't do it.

Nah; the SDM changes all the time.  It's hard to hand out
citations to it without an explicit version because of that.
There are mistakes all over it; most of them are pretty minor,
like cross-referring to an old section number or something.
Each revision fixes a few and adds a few others.

I think it just hasn't occurred to anyone that it could be
clearer.

>This sentence already exists in my 1994-vintage Pentium Processor
>User's Manual Vol. 3.  There it is preceeded by:
>
>|The LOCK prefix functions only with the following instructions:
>|
>|...
>|XCHG reg, mem
>|XCHG mem, reg
>|...
>
>With no occurence of XCHG reg, reg anywhere.  But, OTOH, this is not
>really a contradiction to the sentence "The XCHG instruction always
>asserts the LOCK# signal regardless of the presence or absence of the
>LOCK prefix."

Right.  The current text says more or less the same thing,
though phrased slightly differently: "The LOCK prefix can be
prepended only to the following instructions and only to those
forms of the instructions where the destination operand is a
memory operand: [list of instructions...]."

>>What they wrote may have well been exactly what the HW did back then
>>but somewhere between then and now architects and designers figured
>>out other ways and nobody went back to fully scrub the documents.
>
>Actually <https://www.felixcloutier.com/x86/lock> then says that
>"Beginning with the P6 family processors, when [...], the LOCK# signal
>is generally not asserted [...]" and still explains mechanism, finally
>saying "the operation is carried out atomically with regards to
>memory."  If they wrote that as the description of the LOCK prefix,
>much of the rest could be deleted.
>
>Generally, an architecture manual should talk about architectural
>effects, not about asserted signals.
>
>The operational semantics given in
><https://www.felixcloutier.com/x86/lock> is:
>
>| AssertLOCK#(DurationOfAccompaningInstruction);
>
>Oh boy.

That part is fine.  It's talking about the _explicit_ presence
of a `LOCK` prefix, and given the constraints on the
'accompaning' [sic] instruction, that tracks exactly what the
description says.  Volume 3A, sec 11.1.2, describes bus locking,
and what "asserting LOCK#" means.

	- Dan C.

Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Performance of xchg reg,reg anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-13 08:43 +0000
  Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-14 00:23 +0000
    Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-14 07:00 +0000
      Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-14 22:35 +0000
        Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-14 23:07 +0000
        Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-15 06:05 +0000
          Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-15 07:06 +0000
            Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2026-10-16 09:47 -0400
              Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-16 16:04 +0000
              Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 05:46 +0000
  Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-14 22:29 +0300
  Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-15 14:21 -0700
    Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-15 21:42 +0000
      Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@tmsw.no> - 2026-10-16 14:45 +0200
    Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-16 05:50 +0000
      Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-16 11:34 +0300
        Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-16 18:23 +0000
          Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-10-16 20:48 +0000
            Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 14:28 -0700
            Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-17 09:48 +0000
          Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-17 02:50 +0000
            Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:11 +0000
              Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-17 17:31 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-17 19:39 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-17 23:20 +0300
                Re: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:54 +0000
                Re: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg) George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-10-18 09:45 -0400
                Algol 68 (was: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg)) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-18 14:08 +0000
                Re: Algol 68 (was: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg)) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-19 00:09 +0000
                Re: Algol 68 (was Re: Documentation) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 01:46 +0000
                Re: Algol 68 (was Re: Documentation) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-21 14:15 +0000
                Re: Algol 68 (was Re: Documentation) Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2026-10-21 18:34 +0300
                Re: Algol 68 (was Re: Documentation) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-21 19:38 +0000
                Re: Algol 68 (was Re: Documentation) aph@littlepinkcloud.invalid - 2026-10-22 09:51 +0000
                Re: Algol 68 (was Re: Documentation) Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-10-22 14:15 -0700
                Re: Algol 68 (was Re: Documentation) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-10-23 14:08 +0000
                Re: PL/I, was Algol 68 (was: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg)) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-10-19 03:24 +0000
                Re: PL/I, was Algol 68 (was: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg)) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-19 05:34 +0000
                Re: Algol 68 Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-10-18 23:34 -0400
                Re: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg) quadibloc@invalid.com (John Savard) - 2026-10-19 00:18 +0000
                Re: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-19 01:52 +0000
                Re: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg) George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-10-19 14:50 -0400
                Re: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-20 02:05 +0000
                Re: Algol 68 (was Re: Documentation) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 01:54 +0000
                Re: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-10-19 07:44 +0000
                Re: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-10-19 12:24 -0400
                Re: Documentation (was Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg) MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-18 17:48 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-10-18 08:59 -0400
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-18 15:08 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 18:43 +0300
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-18 16:57 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 20:47 +0300
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-18 18:07 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-18 21:04 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-10-18 23:43 -0400
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2026-10-19 06:57 -0700
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 14:27 -0700
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-10-20 10:00 -0400
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-20 02:00 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-10-20 14:09 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 16:44 -0700
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-10-20 10:05 -0400
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-20 19:56 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-10-22 10:54 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-22 22:11 +0300
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-18 17:40 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 20:54 +0300
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-18 18:25 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-18 18:01 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-18 17:59 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-18 17:09 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2026-10-18 12:31 -0400
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-10-18 17:47 +0000
            Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 12:27 -0700
              Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2026-10-19 09:38 -0400
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 14:08 -0700
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 21:21 +0000
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 14:26 -0700
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg Joseph Seigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2026-10-19 19:17 -0400
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 22:41 -0700
                Re: Performance of xchg reg,reg MitchAlsup <user5857@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-10-20 16:45 +0000

csiph-web