From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753188Ab3KSWEN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 19 Nov 2013 17:04:13 -0500
Received: from mail-yh0-f42.google.com ([209.85.213.42]:33869 "EHLO
	mail-yh0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751723Ab3KSWEM (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 19 Nov 2013 17:04:12 -0500
Message-ID: <528BDEA9.1050708@twiddle.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 07:56:57 +1000
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
CC: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>, lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org,
        Nathan Lynch <Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>, "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Multiple local register variables w/ same register
References: <52803E5D.3050109@mentor.com> <52851395.3010306@mentor.com> <67652521.68027.1384482849638.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <1691607547.70809.1384874952002.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <20131119160502.GG11778@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> <1656507422.70913.1384880540574.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <20131119173312.GP16796@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <20131119173312.GP16796@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 11/20/2013 03:33 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 05:02:20PM +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> Unfortunately I don't have a ARM cross-compiler setup ready. Nathan could test
>> it for us though.
>>
>> It might shuffle things around enough to work around the issue, but with the
>> approach you propose, I would be concerned about the compiler being within
>> its rights to reorder the code into the following sequence:
>>
>> struct thread_info *ptra, *ptrb;
>>
>> ptra = current_thread_info();
>> /*
>>  * each current_thread_info() would have a clobber on *sp, which orders
>>  * those two wrt each other.
>>   */
>> ptrb = current_thread_info();
>>
>> load from ptra->preempt_count;
>> /*
>>  * however, the following accesses that depend on ptra and ptrb could be
>>  * reordered if the compiler has no way to know that ptra and ptrb are
>>  * aliased.
>>  */
>> store to ptrb->preempt_count;
>>
>> One question that might be worth asking: with the local register variable
>> extension (http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.8.2/gcc/Local-Reg-Vars.html#Local-Reg-Vars)
>> (thanks to Jakub for the pointer), should the compiler consider two variables
>> bound to the same register as being aliased or not ? AFAIU, local reg vars appear
>> to be architecture-specific, so maybe there is something fishy on ARM ?

It appears not:

int __attribute__((noinline)) f(void)
{
  {
    register int x __asm__("eax");
    x = 1;
  }
  {
    register int y __asm__("eax");
    return ++y;
  }
}

extern void abort(void);

int main(void)
{
  if (f() != 2)
    abort();
  return 0;
}

Anyone see anything wrong with the testcase?  Do we thing this sort of thing
ought to work, perhaps with scopes lengthened?


r~