From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965117AbWDNI1r (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Apr 2006 04:27:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751223AbWDNI1r (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Apr 2006 04:27:47 -0400 Received: from iona.labri.fr ([147.210.8.143]:37528 "EHLO iona.labri.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751203AbWDNI1q (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Apr 2006 04:27:46 -0400 Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 10:28:09 +0200 From: Samuel Thibault To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org Subject: __cmpxchg_u64 and llsc/LLSC_WAR Message-ID: <20060414082809.GA4283@implementation.labri.fr> Mail-Followup-To: Samuel Thibault , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, In linux/include/asm-mips/system.h:__cmpxchg_u64(), one can read if (cpu_has_llsc) { asm(stuff with beqzl); } else if (cpu_has_llsc) { asm(stuff with beqz); } else { C code; } There's no test for "LLSC_WAR", is that on purpose? (i.e.. is beqzl always needed rather than beqz?) Regards, Samuel