From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 4/6] x86: provide xadd()
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 15:07:55 +0100
Message-ID: <1429193275.25195.129.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1428675597-28465-1-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
	<1428675597-28465-5-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
	<20150416112556.GI13443@deinos.phlegethon.org>
	<552FBDDF0200007800072BF6@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<20150416124925.GC13441@deinos.phlegethon.org>
	<1429188927.25195.122.camel@citrix.com>
	<552FD3000200007800072C97@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>) id 1YikUk-0004fN-E0
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 14:10:18 +0000
In-Reply-To: <552FD3000200007800072C97@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Thu, 2015-04-16 at 14:19 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 16.04.15 at 14:55, <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-04-16 at 13:49 +0100, Tim Deegan wrote:
> >> At 12:49 +0100 on 16 Apr (1429188559), Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> > >>> On 16.04.15 at 13:25, <tim@xen.org> wrote:
> >> > > But also: AFAICS the GCC builtin __sync_fetch_and_add() does almost
> >> > > exactly this (the difference being that those are also compiler
> >> > > barriers where this is only a CPU barrier).  Should we be using it
> >> > > instead?
> >> > 
> >> > I'm afraid that's useful only from gcc 4.5.x onwards; earlier versions
> >> > (on x86 at least) simply generate a function call relying on a library to
> >> > implement it.
> >> 
> >> Darn. :(
> > 
> > Might it still be a better generic fallback than the C/cmpxchg one?
> > 
> > On x86 you'd get the asm version, and on ARM you need 4.5.x onwards
> 
> Is that the case even for ARM32?

Erm, I thought so when I wrote it but now I think again I'm not actually
so sure.

> > anyway, plus in general the ARM folks seem to recommend using the
> > builtins more anyway.
> 
> I assume you checked that 4.5.x actually expands said builtin for
> ARM (as I only checked x86)?

No, I hadn't, I should though, you are right.

Ian.