From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64 : support atomic ops with 64 bits integer values
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 08:04:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48A6EC77.8080904@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080816073926.GA19546@Krystal>
Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> x86_64 add/sub atomic ops does not seems to accept integer values bigger
> than 32 bits as immediates. Intel's add/sub documentation specifies they
> have to be passed as registers.
This is correct; this is in fact true for all instructions except "mov".
Whether it's sign- or zero-extending is sometimes subtle, but not in
these cases.
Do you happen to know if this is a manifest bug in the current kernel
(i.e. if there is anywhere we're using more than ±2 GB as a constant to
these functions?)
Either way, I'll queue this up to tip:x86/urgent if Ingo hasn't already
since this is a pure bug fix.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-16 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-16 7:39 [PATCH] x86_64 : support atomic ops with 64 bits integer values Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-16 15:04 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2008-08-16 15:43 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-16 17:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-16 21:19 ` [RFC PATCH] Fair rwlock Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-16 21:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-17 7:53 ` [RFC PATCH] Fair low-latency rwlock v3 Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-17 16:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-17 19:10 ` [RFC PATCH] Fair low-latency rwlock v5 Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-17 21:30 ` [RFC PATCH] Fair low-latency rwlock v5 (updated benchmarks) Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-18 18:59 ` [RFC PATCH] Fair low-latency rwlock v5 Linus Torvalds
2008-08-18 23:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-19 6:04 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-19 7:33 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-19 9:06 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-19 16:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-21 20:50 ` [RFC PATCH] Writer-biased low-latency rwlock v8 Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-21 21:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-21 21:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-21 22:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-23 5:09 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-23 18:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-23 20:30 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-23 21:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-21 21:26 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-08-21 21:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-25 19:20 ` [RFC PATCH] Fair low-latency rwlock v5 Peter Zijlstra
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=48A6EC77.8080904@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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.