From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9911C3A589 for ; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 12:03:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DCF02173B for ; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 12:03:31 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6DCF02173B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46BG0x0vqCzDrNG for ; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 22:03:29 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=permerror (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.crashing.org (client-ip=63.228.1.57; helo=gate.crashing.org; envelope-from=segher@kernel.crashing.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46BFz841JzzDqtm for ; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 22:01:56 +1000 (AEST) Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id x7IC1aC2002066; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 07:01:37 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id x7IC1ZQg002061; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 07:01:35 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 07:01:35 -0500 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Christophe Leroy Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: optimise WARN_ON() Message-ID: <20190818120135.GV31406@gate.crashing.org> References: <20190817090442.C5FEF106613@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190817090442.C5FEF106613@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 09:04:42AM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Unlike BUG_ON(x), WARN_ON(x) uses !!(x) as the trigger > of the t(d/w)nei instruction instead of using directly the > value of x. > > This leads to GCC adding unnecessary pair of addic/subfe. And it has to, it is passed as an "r" to an asm, GCC has to put the "!!" value into a register. > By using (x) instead of !!(x) like BUG_ON() does, the additional > instructions go away: But is it correct? What happens if you pass an int to WARN_ON, on a 64-bit kernel? (You might want to have 64-bit generate either tw or td. But, with your __builtin_trap patch, all that will be automatic). Segher