lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] KVM: Avoid using vmx instruction directly
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
>
> Like "volatile" variables, I think "asm volatile" is probably overused.
> If you want to guarantee specific ordering of asms, it's probably better
> to add an explicit dependency between them rather than rely on asm
> volatile; this could either be a "memory" clobber, or something more
> fine-grained. For example:
>
> /* need never be instansiated; never actually referenced */
> extern int spin_sequencer;
>
> /* %0 never referenced */
> asm("take spinlock" : "+m" (spin_sequencer)...);
>
> ...
>
> /* again, %0 never referenced */
> asm("release spinlock" : "+m" (spin_sequencer)...);
>

Very interesting.

Will it work on load/store architectures? Since all memory access is
through a register, won't the constraint generate a useless register
load (and a use of the variable)?


--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

-
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: 2006-11-22 07:45    [W:0.045 / U:1.988 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site