From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] x86, rwsem: provide __down_write_killable Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 22:45:01 +0200 Message-ID: <20160420204501.GA6815@pd.tnic> References: <1460041951-22347-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <1460041951-22347-11-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <20160413090829.GB29579@gmail.com> <20160413091625.GF14351@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20160413091943.GA17858@gmail.com> <20160413102731.GA29896@gmail.com> <20160413124943.GH14351@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20160420134019.GX3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <91A11395-ACAA-4043-B770-2DF6CBAED54C@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <91A11395-ACAA-4043-B770-2DF6CBAED54C@zytor.com> Sender: linux-alpha-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Michal Hocko , Ingo Molnar , LKML , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "David S. Miller" , Tony Luck , Andrew Morton , Chris Zankel , Max Filippov , x86@kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Josh Poimboeuf List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:04:05AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > The reason it breaks is because the same register can't be an > input-output register and a separate input. However, the input side of > the input-output is probably undefined, and so gcc may not notice. So Michal and I talked about this a while ago. Why do we need the '"a" (sem)' input dependency if '"+a" (ret)' already supplies the same thing? There's also that "=d" (tmp) thing which we don't really need as an output, right? I.e., can we simplify like this? --- #define ____down_write(sem, slow_path) \ ({ \ long tmp = RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS; \ struct rw_semaphore* ret = sem; \ \ asm volatile("# beginning down_write\n\t" \ LOCK_PREFIX " xadd %[tmp],(%[ret])\n\t" \ /* adds 0xffff0001, returns the old value */ \ " test " __ASM_SEL(%w[tmp],%k[tmp]) "," __ASM_SEL(%w[tmp],%k[tmp]) "\n\t" \ /* was the active mask 0 before? */\ " jz 1f\n" \ " call " slow_path "\n" \ "1:\n" \ "# ending down_write" \ : "+m" (sem->count), [ret] "+a" (ret) \ : [tmp] "d" (tmp) \ : "memory", "cc"); \ ret; \ }) -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:50096 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751126AbcDTUpW (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Apr 2016 16:45:22 -0400 Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 22:45:01 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] x86, rwsem: provide __down_write_killable Message-ID: <20160420204501.GA6815@pd.tnic> References: <1460041951-22347-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <1460041951-22347-11-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <20160413090829.GB29579@gmail.com> <20160413091625.GF14351@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20160413091943.GA17858@gmail.com> <20160413102731.GA29896@gmail.com> <20160413124943.GH14351@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20160420134019.GX3448@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <91A11395-ACAA-4043-B770-2DF6CBAED54C@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <91A11395-ACAA-4043-B770-2DF6CBAED54C@zytor.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Michal Hocko , Ingo Molnar , LKML , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "David S. Miller" , Tony Luck , Andrew Morton , Chris Zankel , Max Filippov , x86@kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Josh Poimboeuf Message-ID: <20160420204501.zjwY6XQf5ZqhZle4B0BJh6_I5Gt0oMsDHU5SNKwA5Ms@z> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:04:05AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > The reason it breaks is because the same register can't be an > input-output register and a separate input. However, the input side of > the input-output is probably undefined, and so gcc may not notice. So Michal and I talked about this a while ago. Why do we need the '"a" (sem)' input dependency if '"+a" (ret)' already supplies the same thing? There's also that "=d" (tmp) thing which we don't really need as an output, right? I.e., can we simplify like this? --- #define ____down_write(sem, slow_path) \ ({ \ long tmp = RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS; \ struct rw_semaphore* ret = sem; \ \ asm volatile("# beginning down_write\n\t" \ LOCK_PREFIX " xadd %[tmp],(%[ret])\n\t" \ /* adds 0xffff0001, returns the old value */ \ " test " __ASM_SEL(%w[tmp],%k[tmp]) "," __ASM_SEL(%w[tmp],%k[tmp]) "\n\t" \ /* was the active mask 0 before? */\ " jz 1f\n" \ " call " slow_path "\n" \ "1:\n" \ "# ending down_write" \ : "+m" (sem->count), [ret] "+a" (ret) \ : [tmp] "d" (tmp) \ : "memory", "cc"); \ ret; \ }) -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.