From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>
Cc: ryan.roberts@arm.com, usama.anjum@arm.com, peterz@infradead.org,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, david.laight.linux@gmail.com,
stable@vger.kernel.org, ruanjinjie@huawei.com,
james.morse@arm.com, yang@os.amperecomputing.com, cl@gentwo.org,
maz@kernel.org, david@kernel.org, ljs@kernel.org,
will@kernel.org, ardb@kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/21] arm64: cmpxchg128: LSE: Remove redundant operands
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 12:43:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aqPpU2fHtK4CXOc6@J2N7QTR9R3> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1b0a435e-68c1-46c2-8fc0-310694728772@arm.com>
On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 11:06:48AM +0100, Vladimir Murzin wrote:
> On 9/8/26 16:17, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > @@ -291,15 +291,13 @@ __lse__cmpxchg128##name(volatile u128 *ptr, u128 old, u128 new) \
> > register unsigned long x1 asm ("x1") = o.high; \
> > register unsigned long x2 asm ("x2") = n.low; \
> > register unsigned long x3 asm ("x3") = n.high; \
> > - register unsigned long x4 asm ("x4") = (unsigned long)ptr; \
> > \
> > asm volatile( \
> > __LSE_PREAMBLE \
> > " casp" #mb "\t%[old1], %[old2], %[new1], %[new2], %[v]\n"\
> > : [old1] "+&r" (x0), [old2] "+&r" (x1), \
> > [v] "+Q" (*(u128 *)ptr) \
> > - : [new1] "r" (x2), [new2] "r" (x3), [ptr] "r" (x4), \
> > - [oldval1] "r" (o.low), [oldval2] "r" (o.high) \
>
> Both 'old1' and #old are read and write and that reflected by '+' constraint modifier.
> However, I do not fully understand why we need earlyclobber for them:
> - they are not written before read
> - we already constrained registers, so they do not overlap
> - cmpxchg few lines above doesn't need it
I agree that the earlyclobber shouldn't be necessary for 'old1' or
'old2'. I expect it shouldn't have a negative effect on code generation
here, as removing it doesn't give the compiler any new freedom to
allocate registers differently, but maybe it causes the compiler to do a
bit more work internally.
I'll leave this patch as-is for now, but I am happy to delete the
earlyclobber in a subsequent patch (or to ack a patch doing so), if
people want?
> I had a look at ll/sc counterpart and both earlyclobebr and '=' constraint modifier
> make sense there, since we do not want registers to overlap and they are written.
>
> I admit might be missing something. Anyway, FWIW
I don't think you're missing anything here. I suspect we just
copy-pasted the LL/SC constraints without thinking too hard when this
was added in commit:
b23e139d0b66c021 ("arch: Introduce arch_{,try_}_cmpxchg128{,_local}()")
> Reviewed-by: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>
Thanks!
Mark.
>
> > + : [new1] "r" (x2), [new2] "r" (x3) \
> > : cl); \
> > \
> > r.low = x0; r.high = x1; \
> > -- 2.30.2
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-11 11:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-08 15:17 [PATCH v4 00/21] Preemptible this_cpu_*() operations Mark Rutland
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 01/21] arm64: percpu: Fix this_cpu_write() casting Mark Rutland
2026-09-10 10:56 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 02/21] arm64: percpu: Fix this_cpu_and() mask generation Mark Rutland
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 03/21] arm64: percpu: Fix LSE operations on {8,16}-bit types Mark Rutland
2026-09-10 15:18 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 04/21] arm64: cmpxchg: LL/SC: Avoid redundant extension Mark Rutland
2026-09-15 14:21 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 05/21] arm64: cmpxchg128: LSE: Remove redundant operands Mark Rutland
2026-09-10 10:06 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-11 11:43 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 06/21] arm64: preempt: Simplify and optimize __preempt_count_dec_and_test() Mark Rutland
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 07/21] arm64: preempt: Treat should_resched() as unlikely Mark Rutland
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 08/21] arm64: ptrace: Always inline pt_regs_[read,write}_reg() Mark Rutland
2026-09-11 10:20 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 09/21] arm64: percpu: Factor out percpu offset asm Mark Rutland
2026-09-11 12:39 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 10/21] arm64: gpr-num: Add wxN aliases for wN registers Mark Rutland
2026-09-11 12:43 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 11/21] arm64: gpr-num: add __GPR_NUM() helper Mark Rutland
2026-09-10 14:24 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 12/21] arm64: entry: sdei: Restore all clobberable GPRs Mark Rutland
2026-09-11 12:47 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 13/21] arm64: entry: sdei: Make 'tsk' available Mark Rutland
2026-09-10 13:06 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 14/21] arm64: percpu: Add infrastructure for preemptible this_cpu_*() ops Mark Rutland
2026-09-15 14:19 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 15/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible read/write ops Mark Rutland
2026-09-15 11:58 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 16/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible void RMW ops Mark Rutland
2026-09-15 12:01 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 17/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible return " Mark Rutland
2026-09-15 12:03 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 18/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible XCHG ops Mark Rutland
2026-09-15 12:07 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 19/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible CMPXCHG ops Mark Rutland
2026-09-15 14:20 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 20/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible CMPXCHG128 ops Mark Rutland
2026-09-15 14:20 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 21/21] arm64: percpu: Remove _pcp_protect*() wrappers Mark Rutland
2026-09-15 14:21 ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-09-11 13:44 ` [PATCH v4 00/21] Preemptible this_cpu_*() operations Will Deacon
2026-09-24 16:03 ` (subset) " Catalin Marinas
2026-09-30 13:14 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
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=aqPpU2fHtK4CXOc6@J2N7QTR9R3 \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ruanjinjie@huawei.com \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=usama.anjum@arm.com \
--cc=vladimir.murzin@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yang@os.amperecomputing.com \
/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.