[lkml]   [2004]   [Jun]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Fix ppc64 out_be64
    Benjamin> Ugh ? The syntax of std is std rS, ds(rA), so your fix
Benjamin> doesn't look good to me, and it definitely builds with
Benjamin> the current syntax, though I agree the type is indeed
Benjamin> wrong. I also spotted another bug where we forgot to
Benjamin> change an eieio into sync in there though.

Although the kernel builds, it's only because no one actually uses
out_be64. You can try the old version and see:

> cat foo.c
static inline void out_be64(volatile unsigned long *addr, unsigned
long val)
__asm__ __volatile__("std %1,0(%0); eieio" : "=m" (*addr) :
"r" (val));

void foo(void *x, unsigned long y)
out_be64(x, y);
$ ${CROSS_COMPILE}gcc -save-temps -c foo.c
foo.s: Assembler messages:
foo.s:49: Error: syntax error; found `(' but expected `)'
foo.s:49: Error: junk at end of line: `(9))'

Looking at foo.s, it's pretty obvious that %0 is already in the ds(rA)
form, and adding 0() around it breaks things. out_be64 expands to:

std 0,0(0(9)); eieio

It's possible this is an artifact of my cross-toolchain (gcc
3.4.0/binutils 2.15 built with Dan Kegel's crosstool),

Benjamin> Does this totally untested patch works for you ?

Yes, that looks fine (after fixing val to be unsigned long in
out_be64). You know infinitely more about ppc64 asm than I do so I'm
sure your version is better.

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 14:03    [W:0.061 / U:3.388 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site