[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    Subject[Q] Implementation of spin_lock on i386: why "rep;nop" ?
    Hi all,

    One of my coworkers directed my attention to the implementation of
    spinlocks on IA-32. In spin_lock_string, we can read:

    "cmpb $0,%0\n\t" \
    "rep;nop\n\t" \
    "jle 2b\n\t" \

    The "rep;nop" line looks dubious, since the IA-32 programmer's manual from
    Intel (year 2001) mentions that the behaviour of REP is undefined when it
    is not used with string opcodes. BTW, according to the same manual, REP is
    supposed to modify ecx, but it looks like is is not the case here... which
    is fortunate, since ecx is never saved. :-)

    What is the intent behind this "rep;nop" ? Does it really rely on an
    undocumented behaviour ?


    Jean-Marc Saffroy - Research Engineer - Silicomp Research Institute

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:03    [W:0.021 / U:0.688 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site