lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Dec]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [cpuops cmpxchg double V1 1/4] Generic support for this_cpu_cmpxchg_double
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010, Tejun Heo wrote:

> > I'm a bit confused on this one. The standard cmpxchg() takes a scalar
> > and a pointer, and returns a scalar. The equivalent for the "double"
> > variety would be to return a compound object, basically:
> >
> > struct double_ulong {
> > unsigned long v[2];
> > };
> >
> > ... which can be returned in registers on both i386 and x86-64.

Really? How would that work? I tried with uint128 but could not get the
compiler to do the right thing.

> > It's a bit clumsy from a type perspective, but I'm not sure that that is
> > a bad thing. Doing too much type genericity has caused us problems in
> > the past.
>
> Yeah, the above might be better too. Is there any reason to use
> cmpxchg_double on anything smaller?

Yes. You may want to use cmpxchg_double on 32 bit entities for backwards
compatibilities sake or any other smaller unit size. But those could also
be realized using this_cpu_cmpxchg_<double the size> by just aggregating
the amount.

If we can indeed pass 128 bit entities (as claimed by hpa) via registers
then the logical choice would be to do

this_cpu_cmpxchg_16(pcp, old, new)

instead of cmpxchg_double. All parameters would have to be bit.
Then we can avoid the strange cmpxchg_double semantics and can completely
avoid introducing those.






\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-12-24 01:19    [W:0.061 / U:0.448 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site