From: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH 3/4] tst_atomic: add atomic_add_return for x86/64, ppc/64 and s390/x
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:36:06 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <165775875.873245.1460558166172.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160413135957.GA11529@rei.lan>
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cyril Hrubis" <chrubis@suse.cz>
> To: "Jan Stancek" <jstancek@redhat.com>
> Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 April, 2016 3:59:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 3/4] tst_atomic: add atomic_add_return for x86/64, ppc/64 and s390/x
>
> Hi!
> > +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
> > +#define HAVE_ATOMIC_ADD_RETURN 1
> > +extern void __xadd_wrong_size(void);
> > +static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) int atomic_add_return(int i,
> > int *v)
> > +{
> > + int __ret = i;
> > +
> > + switch (sizeof(*v)) {
> > + case 1:
> > + asm volatile ("lock; xaddb %b0, %1\n"
> > + : "+q" (__ret), "+m" (*v) : : "memory", "cc");
> > + break;
> > + case 2:
> > + asm volatile ("lock; xaddw %w0, %1\n"
> > + : "+r" (__ret), "+m" (*v) : : "memory", "cc");
> > + break;
>
> Do we really need byte and word version? As far as I can tell int is 4
> bytes on x86 and x86_64 and unlike kernel where this is a macro we
> cannot pass anything else than int.
Not really, it's again case where I tried to preserve original kernel code.
>
> > + case 4:
> > + asm volatile ("lock; xaddl %0, %1\n"
> > + : "+r" (__ret), "+m" (*v) : : "memory", "cc");
> > + break;
> > + case 8:
> > + asm volatile ("lock; xaddq %q0, %1\n"
> > + : "+r" (__ret), "+m" (*v) : : "memory", "cc");
> > + break;
>
> The same goes for the quad version here.
>
> > + default:
> > + __xadd_wrong_size();
>
> So this supposedly causes linker error by trying to link nonexistent
> function, right?
>
> I guess that we should either add nonexistent to the function name or
> short commment with explanation.
I can add both.
>
> Also it should start with tst_ in order to avoid teoretical collisions
> with system functions.
>
> > + }
> > + return i + __ret;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__powerpc64__)
> > +#define HAVE_ATOMIC_ADD_RETURN 1
> > +static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) int atomic_add_return(int i,
> > int *v)
> > +{
> > + int t;
> > +
> > + asm volatile(
> > + " sync\n"
> > + "1: lwarx %0,0,%2 # atomic_add_return\n"
> > + " add %0,%1,%0\n"
> > + " stwcx. %0,0,%2 \n"
> > + " bne- 1b\n"
> > + " sync\n"
> > + : "=&r" (t)
> > + : "r" (i), "r" (v)
> > + : "cc", "memory");
> > + return t;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +#if defined(__s390__) || defined(__s390x__)
> > +#define HAVE_ATOMIC_ADD_RETURN 1
> > +static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) int atomic_add_return(int i,
> > int *v)
> > +{
> > + int old_val, new_val;
> > +
> > + asm volatile(
> > + " l %0,%2\n"
> > + "0: lr %1,%0\n"
> > + " ar %1,%3\n"
> > + " cs %0,%1,%2\n"
> > + " jl 0b"
> > + : "=&d" (old_val), "=&d" (new_val), "+Q" (*v)
> > + : "d" (i)
> > + : "cc", "memory");
> > + return old_val + i;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +#endif /* HAVE_SYNC_ADD_AND_FETCH == 1 */
> > +
> > +#if !defined(HAVE_ATOMIC_ADD_RETURN)
> > #error Your compiler does not provide __sync_add_and_fetch and LTP\
> > implementation is missing for your architecture.
> > #endif
>
> --
> Cyril Hrubis
> chrubis@suse.cz
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-13 14:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-13 13:10 [LTP] [PATCH 1/4] tst_atomic: make tst_atomic_inc take a signed integer Jan Stancek
2016-04-13 13:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH 2/4] m4: add a check for __sync_add_and_fetch Jan Stancek
2016-04-13 14:04 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-04-13 13:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH 3/4] tst_atomic: add atomic_add_return for x86/64, ppc/64 and s390/x Jan Stancek
2016-04-13 13:59 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-04-13 14:36 ` Jan Stancek [this message]
2016-04-13 15:03 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-04-13 13:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH 4/4] tst_atomic: add test for tst_atomic_inc Jan Stancek
2016-04-13 14:15 ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-04-13 14:07 ` [LTP] [PATCH 1/4] tst_atomic: make tst_atomic_inc take a signed integer Cyril Hrubis
2016-04-13 14:32 ` Jan Stancek
2016-04-13 15:33 ` Cyril Hrubis
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=165775875.873245.1460558166172.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com \
--to=jstancek@redhat.com \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/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