xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix wait code asm() constraints
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2012 13:05:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CC417D03.3A67E%keir.xen@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <501BAA990200007800092661@nat28.tlf.novell.com>

On 03/08/2012 09:40, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:

> In __prepare_to_wait(), properly mark early clobbered registers. By
> doing so, we at once eliminate the need to save/restore rCX and rDI.

Okay, this patch has my blessing as is. But please add a remark that the
existing constraints are falling foul of a strict reading of the gcc
specification, and are actually okay in practice (being very
straightforward, no memory constraints, etc). I really thought you had found
a bug in practice, but this was not the case.

> In check_wakeup_from_wait(), make the current constraints match by
> removing the code that actuall alters registers. By adjusting the
> resume address in __prepare_to_wait(), we can simply re-use the copying
> operation there (rather than doing a second pointless copy in the
> opposite direction after branching to the resume point), which at once
> eliminates the need for re-loading rCX and rDI inside the asm().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

Acked-by: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>

> --- a/xen/common/wait.c
> +++ b/xen/common/wait.c
> @@ -126,6 +126,7 @@ static void __prepare_to_wait(struct wai
>  {
>      char *cpu_info = (char *)get_cpu_info();
>      struct vcpu *curr = current;
> +    unsigned long dummy;
>  
>      ASSERT(wqv->esp == 0);
>  
> @@ -140,27 +141,27 @@ static void __prepare_to_wait(struct wai
>  
>      asm volatile (
>  #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> -        "push %%rax; push %%rbx; push %%rcx; push %%rdx; push %%rdi; "
> +        "push %%rax; push %%rbx; push %%rdx; "
>          "push %%rbp; push %%r8; push %%r9; push %%r10; push %%r11; "
>          "push %%r12; push %%r13; push %%r14; push %%r15; call 1f; "
> -        "1: mov 80(%%rsp),%%rdi; mov 96(%%rsp),%%rcx; mov %%rsp,%%rsi; "
> +        "1: mov %%rsp,%%rsi; addq $2f-1b,(%%rsp); "
>          "sub %%rsi,%%rcx; cmp %3,%%rcx; jbe 2f; "
>          "xor %%esi,%%esi; jmp 3f; "
>          "2: rep movsb; mov %%rsp,%%rsi; 3: pop %%rax; "
>          "pop %%r15; pop %%r14; pop %%r13; pop %%r12; "
>          "pop %%r11; pop %%r10; pop %%r9; pop %%r8; "
> -        "pop %%rbp; pop %%rdi; pop %%rdx; pop %%rcx; pop %%rbx; pop %%rax"
> +        "pop %%rbp; pop %%rdx; pop %%rbx; pop %%rax"
>  #else
> -        "push %%eax; push %%ebx; push %%ecx; push %%edx; push %%edi; "
> +        "push %%eax; push %%ebx; push %%edx; "
>          "push %%ebp; call 1f; "
> -        "1: mov 8(%%esp),%%edi; mov 16(%%esp),%%ecx; mov %%esp,%%esi; "
> +        "1: mov %%esp,%%esi; addl $2f-1b,(%%esp); "
>          "sub %%esi,%%ecx; cmp %3,%%ecx; jbe 2f; "
>          "xor %%esi,%%esi; jmp 3f; "
>          "2: rep movsb; mov %%esp,%%esi; 3: pop %%eax; "
> -        "pop %%ebp; pop %%edi; pop %%edx; pop %%ecx; pop %%ebx; pop %%eax"
> +        "pop %%ebp; pop %%edx; pop %%ebx; pop %%eax"
>  #endif
> -        : "=S" (wqv->esp)
> -        : "c" (cpu_info), "D" (wqv->stack), "i" (PAGE_SIZE)
> +        : "=&S" (wqv->esp), "=&c" (dummy), "=&D" (dummy)
> +        : "i" (PAGE_SIZE), "1" (cpu_info), "2" (wqv->stack)
>          : "memory" );
>  
>      if ( unlikely(wqv->esp == 0) )
> @@ -200,7 +201,7 @@ void check_wakeup_from_wait(void)
>      }
>  
>      asm volatile (
> -        "mov %1,%%"__OP"sp; rep movsb; jmp *(%%"__OP"sp)"
> +        "mov %1,%%"__OP"sp; jmp *(%0)"
>          : : "S" (wqv->stack), "D" (wqv->esp),
>          "c" ((char *)get_cpu_info() - (char *)wqv->esp)
>          : "memory" );
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

      parent reply	other threads:[~2012-08-03 12:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-08-03  8:40 [PATCH] x86: fix wait code asm() constraints Jan Beulich
2012-08-03 10:04 ` Keir Fraser
2012-08-03 10:34   ` Jan Beulich
2012-08-03 11:00     ` Keir Fraser
2012-08-03 11:36       ` Jan Beulich
2012-08-03 12:08         ` Keir Fraser
2012-08-03 12:15           ` Jan Beulich
2012-08-03 12:54             ` Keir Fraser
2012-08-03 12:05 ` Keir Fraser [this message]

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=CC417D03.3A67E%keir.xen@gmail.com \
    --to=keir.xen@gmail.com \
    --cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).