public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Luca Barbieri <luca@luca-barbieri.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86-32: improve atomic64_t functions (v2)
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 23:35:31 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B8B6E43.9030305@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ff13bc9a1002260323k6b3f38ah4f0505e401dcf77d@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/26/2010 03:23 AM, Luca Barbieri wrote:
> Sent patches, both to conditionally perform the test and implement the
> functions for x86 and x86-64.

Yes, and with the test turned on, the kernel crashes immediately on boot
on x86-64.

Some minor investigation reveals the following:

lib/atomic64.c has the wrong return value for atomic64_add_unless().
With "wrong" I mean it is the opposite sense compared to
atomic_add_unless(), not just on x86 but on all architectures.

Accordingly, I have to conclude that lib/atomic64.c is buggy, and that
since your test matches that bug, I will have to conclude that your
x86-32 implementation is also buggy.  Thus, please send patches to fix
your test and your 32-bit implementations (and preferrably
lib/atomic64.c too, but I can do that just fine.)

Cc: Paul Mackerras who did the generic atomic64_t implementation for
verification that this is indeed a bug.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.


  reply	other threads:[~2010-03-01  7:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-19 17:26 [PATCH 0/5] x86-32: improve atomic64_t functions (v2) Luca Barbieri
2010-02-19 17:26 ` [PATCH 1/5] x86: add support for relative CALL and JMP in alternatives (v2) Luca Barbieri
2010-02-19 17:26 ` [PATCH 2/5] x86: add support for lock prefix " Luca Barbieri
2010-02-19 17:26 ` [PATCH 3/5] x86-32: allow UP/SMP lock replacement in cmpxchg64 (v2) Luca Barbieri
2010-02-19 17:26 ` [PATCH 4/5] lib: add self-test for atomic64_t Luca Barbieri
2010-02-19 17:26 ` [PATCH 5/5] x86-32: rewrite 32-bit atomic64 functions in assembly (v2) Luca Barbieri
2010-02-23 22:47 ` [PATCH 0/5] x86-32: improve atomic64_t functions (v2) H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-24  9:56   ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-26 10:14     ` Ingo Molnar
2010-02-26 11:08       ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-26 11:23         ` Luca Barbieri
2010-03-01  7:35           ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2010-03-01  8:49             ` Paul Mackerras
2010-03-01 17:16             ` Luca Barbieri
2010-03-01 17:31               ` Luca Barbieri

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=4B8B6E43.9030305@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luca@luca-barbieri.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    /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