From: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH 3/4] tst_atomic: add atomic_add_return for x86/64, ppc/64 and s390/x
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:36:06 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <165775875.873245.1460558166172.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160413135957.GA11529@rei.lan>
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cyril Hrubis" <chrubis@suse.cz>
> To: "Jan Stancek" <jstancek@redhat.com>
> Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 April, 2016 3:59:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 3/4] tst_atomic: add atomic_add_return for x86/64, ppc/64 and s390/x
>
> Hi!
> > +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
> > +#define HAVE_ATOMIC_ADD_RETURN 1
> > +extern void __xadd_wrong_size(void);
> > +static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) int atomic_add_return(int i,
> > int *v)
> > +{
> > + int __ret = i;
> > +
> > + switch (sizeof(*v)) {
> > + case 1:
> > + asm volatile ("lock; xaddb %b0, %1\n"
> > + : "+q" (__ret), "+m" (*v) : : "memory", "cc");
> > + break;
> > + case 2:
> > + asm volatile ("lock; xaddw %w0, %1\n"
> > + : "+r" (__ret), "+m" (*v) : : "memory", "cc");
> > + break;
>
> Do we really need byte and word version? As far as I can tell int is 4
> bytes on x86 and x86_64 and unlike kernel where this is a macro we
> cannot pass anything else than int.
Not really, it's again case where I tried to preserve original kernel code.
>
> > + case 4:
> > + asm volatile ("lock; xaddl %0, %1\n"
> > + : "+r" (__ret), "+m" (*v) : : "memory", "cc");
> > + break;
> > + case 8:
> > + asm volatile ("lock; xaddq %q0, %1\n"
> > + : "+r" (__ret), "+m" (*v) : : "memory", "cc");
> > + break;
>
> The same goes for the quad version here.
>
> > + default:
> > + __xadd_wrong_size();
>
> So this supposedly causes linker error by trying to link nonexistent
> function, right?
>
> I guess that we should either add nonexistent to the function name or
> short commment with explanation.
I can add both.
>
> Also it should start with tst_ in order to avoid teoretical collisions
> with system functions.
>
> > + }
> > + return i + __ret;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__powerpc64__)
> > +#define HAVE_ATOMIC_ADD_RETURN 1
> > +static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) int atomic_add_return(int i,
> > int *v)
> > +{
> > + int t;
> > +
> > + asm volatile(
> > + " sync\n"
> > + "1: lwarx %0,0,%2 # atomic_add_return\n"
> > + " add %0,%1,%0\n"
> > + " stwcx. %0,0,%2 \n"
> > + " bne- 1b\n"
> > + " sync\n"
> > + : "=&r" (t)
> > + : "r" (i), "r" (v)
> > + : "cc", "memory");
> > + return t;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +#if defined(__s390__) || defined(__s390x__)
> > +#define HAVE_ATOMIC_ADD_RETURN 1
> > +static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) int atomic_add_return(int i,
> > int *v)
> > +{
> > + int old_val, new_val;
> > +
> > + asm volatile(
> > + " l %0,%2\n"
> > + "0: lr %1,%0\n"
> > + " ar %1,%3\n"
> > + " cs %0,%1,%2\n"
> > + " jl 0b"
> > + : "=&d" (old_val), "=&d" (new_val), "+Q" (*v)
> > + : "d" (i)
> > + : "cc", "memory");
> > + return old_val + i;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +#endif /* HAVE_SYNC_ADD_AND_FETCH == 1 */
> > +
> > +#if !defined(HAVE_ATOMIC_ADD_RETURN)
> > #error Your compiler does not provide __sync_add_and_fetch and LTP\
> > implementation is missing for your architecture.
> > #endif
>
> --
> Cyril Hrubis
> chrubis@suse.cz
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-13 14:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-13 13:10 [LTP] [PATCH 1/4] tst_atomic: make tst_atomic_inc take a signed integer Jan Stancek
2016-04-13 13:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH 2/4] m4: add a check for __sync_add_and_fetch Jan Stancek
2016-04-13 14:04 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-04-13 13:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH 3/4] tst_atomic: add atomic_add_return for x86/64, ppc/64 and s390/x Jan Stancek
2016-04-13 13:59 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-04-13 14:36 ` Jan Stancek [this message]
2016-04-13 15:03 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-04-13 13:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH 4/4] tst_atomic: add test for tst_atomic_inc Jan Stancek
2016-04-13 14:15 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-04-13 14:07 ` [LTP] [PATCH 1/4] tst_atomic: make tst_atomic_inc take a signed integer Cyril Hrubis
2016-04-13 14:32 ` Jan Stancek
2016-04-13 15:33 ` Cyril Hrubis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=165775875.873245.1460558166172.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com \
--to=jstancek@redhat.com \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.