[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
>> Let me say it more clearly: On ARM, it is impossible to perform atomic
>> operations on MMIO space.
> Actually, no one is suggesting that we try to do that at all.
> The discussion about RMW ops on MMIO space started with a comment
> attributed to the gcc developers that one reason why gcc on x86
> doesn't use instructions that do RMW ops on volatile variables is that
> volatile is used to mark MMIO addresses, and there was some
> uncertainty about whether (non-atomic) RMW ops on x86 could be used on
> MMIO. This is in regard to the question about why gcc on x86 always
> moves a volatile variable into a register before doing anything to it.

This question is GCC PR33102, which was incorrectly closed as a
of PR3506 -- and *that* PR was closed because its reporter seemed to
claim the GCC generated code for an increment on a volatile (namely,
machine instructions: load, modify, store) was incorrect, and it has to
be one machine instruction.

> So the whole discussion is irrelevant to ARM, PowerPC and any other
> architecture except x86[-64].

And even there, it's not something the kernel can take advantage of
before GCC 4.4 is in widespread use, if then. Let's move on.


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: 2007-08-21 16:59    [W:0.198 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site