lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [May]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [2.6.6-BK] x86_64 has buggy ffs() implementation
Date
Followup to:  <1084369416.16624.53.camel@imp.csi.cam.ac.uk>
By author: Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cam.ac.uk>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Hi Andi, Andrew, Linus,
>
> x86_64 has incorrect include/asm-x86_64/bitops.h::ffs() implementation.
> It uses "g" instead of "rm" in the insline assembled bsfl instruction.
> (This was spotted by Yuri Per.)
>
> bsfl does not accept constant values but only memory ones. On i386 the
> correct "rm" is used.
>
> This causes NTFS build to fail as gcc optimizes a variable into a
> constant and ffs() then fails to assemble.
>

Of course, this is a good reason to do a __builtin_constant_p()
wrapper that gcc can optimize:

static __inline__ __attribute_const__ int ffs(int x)
{
if ( __builtin_constant_p(x) ) {
unsigned int y = (unsigned int)x;
if ( y >= 0x80000000 )
return 32;
else if ( y >= 0x40000000 )
return 31;
else if /* ... you get the idea ... */
} else {
__asm__("bsfl %1,%0\n\t"
"cmovzl %2,%0"
: "=r" (r) : "rm" (x), "r" (-1));
return r+1;
}
}
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:03    [W:0.075 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site