[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: spin_lock forgets to clobber memory and other smp fixes [was Re: [patch] waitqueue optimization, 2.4.0-test7]

    On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Jamie Lokier wrote:

    > asm *__volatile__* seems to make no difference. I've tried a few things.
    > Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
    > > Maybe we can rely on the __volatile__ statement of the asm that will
    > > enforce that if we write:
    > >
    > > *p = 0;
    > > __asm__ __volatile__("" : :);
    > > *p = 1;
    > >
    > > in the assembler we'll then find both a write of 0 and then a write of 1
    > > to memory.
    > That does 2 writes with gcc-2.96 and also egcs-2.91.66/19990314
    > (Red Hat's kgcc), with or without -fstrict-aliasing.
    > It also does 2 writes without __volatile__.

    Your test is broken.

    Read the gcc documentation. A inline asm with no outputs is implicitly
    considered volatile. So _both_ your tests had volatile there.

    Now, that may not matter that much fo ryour test-case: gcc gets careful
    around inline asm anyway, even without the volatile.

    Change it to something like

    __asm__("":"=r" (x):"0" (x));

    and the "volatile" should matter.

    Not for memory references, perhaps. But for the movement issues.


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

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.021 / U:56.276 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site