From: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
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
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/21] arm64: cmpxchg128: LSE: Remove redundant operands
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:06:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1b0a435e-68c1-46c2-8fc0-310694728772@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260908151741.394589-6-mark.rutland@arm.com>
On 9/8/26 16:17, Mark Rutland wrote:
> The LSE assembly for cmpxhg128*() has redundant operands which cause
> unnecessary register pressure. These operands can be removed without
> adverse effects, as described below.
>
> It is necessary to force specific registers for the 64-bit halves of
> 'old' and 'new', as the encoding of CASP[A][L] requires that these
> halves are allocated into even/odd register pairs, and contemporary
> versions of LLVM don't support a mechanism to allocate a value into an
> even/odd register pair for inline assembly. We manually allocate these
> into x0/x1/x2/x3.
>
> It is not necessary to force the address into a specific register, as
> the encoding of CASP[A][L] can accept this in any GPR or SP. Hence, it
> is not necessary to manually allocate the address into x4 for the
> '[ptr]' operand. The assembly uses the '[v]' operand, and contemporary
> compilers happen to allocate '[v]' into a separate register from
> '[ptr]', meaning that '[ptr]' only serves to create register pressure.
>
> It is not necessary to allocate the '[oldval1]' and '[oldval2]'
> operands, as these are not used by the assembly. The assembly uses the
> '[old1]' and '[old2]' operands for both input and output. The
> '[oldval1]' and '[oldval2]' operands only serve to create register
> pressure.
>
> Remove the redundant operands. This saves on register pressure, as
> demonstrated by the test case below. There's still some unfortunate
> register shuffling due to the manual allocation of 'old' and 'new', but
> this should be less prominent within a larger function.
>
> Test case:
>
> | u128 outline_cmpxchg128(u128 *p, u128 old, u128 new)
> | {
> | return cmpxchg128(p, old, new);
> | }
>
> Generated code before this patch:
>
> | <outline_cmpxchg128>:
> | mov x6, x0
> | mov x1, x3
> | mov x0, x2
> | b 1f
> | mov x2, x4
> | mov x3, x5
> | mov x4, x6
> | mov x5, x0
> | mov x7, x1
> | caspal x0, x1, x2, x3, [x6]
> | ret
> | 1: prfm pstl1strm, [x6]
> | 2: ldxp x8, x7, [x6]
> | cmp x8, x0
> | ccmp x7, x3, #0x0, eq
> | b.ne 3f
> | stlxp w2, x4, x5, [x6]
> | cbnz w2, 2b
> | dmb ish
> | 3: mov x0, x8
> | mov x1, x7
> | ret
>
> Generated code after this patch:
>
> | <outline_cmpxchg128>:
> | mov x6, x0
> | mov x0, x2
> | b 1f
> | mov x1, x3
> | mov x2, x4
> | mov x3, x5
> | caspal x0, x1, x2, x3, [x6]
> | ret
> | 1: prfm pstl1strm, [x6]
> | 2: ldxp x8, x7, [x6]
> | cmp x8, x0
> | ccmp x7, x3, #0x0, eq
> | 3f
> | stlxp w2, x4, x5, [x6]
> | cbnz w2, 2b
> | dmb ish
> | 3: mov x0, x8
> | mov x1, x7
> | ret
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Tested-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@arm.com>
> Cc: Ada Couprie Diaz <ada.coupriediaz@arm.com>
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> Cc: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@huawei.com>
> Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> Cc: Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic_lse.h | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic_lse.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic_lse.h
> index afad1849c4cf5..d588af0565331 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic_lse.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic_lse.h
> @@ -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 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
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>
> + : [new1] "r" (x2), [new2] "r" (x3) \
> : cl); \
> \
> r.low = x0; r.high = x1; \
> -- 2.30.2
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-10 10:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ 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
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 05/21] arm64: cmpxchg128: LSE: Remove redundant operands Mark Rutland
2026-09-10 10:06 ` Vladimir Murzin [this message]
2026-09-11 11:43 ` Mark Rutland
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
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 15/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible read/write ops Mark Rutland
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 16/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible void RMW ops Mark Rutland
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 17/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible return " Mark Rutland
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 18/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible XCHG ops Mark Rutland
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 19/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible CMPXCHG ops Mark Rutland
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 20/21] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible CMPXCHG128 ops Mark Rutland
2026-09-08 15:17 ` [PATCH v4 21/21] arm64: percpu: Remove _pcp_protect*() wrappers Mark Rutland
2026-09-11 13:44 ` [PATCH v4 00/21] Preemptible this_cpu_*() operations Will Deacon
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=1b0a435e-68c1-46c2-8fc0-310694728772@arm.com \
--to=vladimir.murzin@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=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--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=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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox