Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1427969

Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output

Show all headers | View raw

On June 21, 2016 2:06:20 AM PDT, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
>H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, that sounds promising.  I wonder how David's model, using
>> intrinsics (do we have enough intrinsics to actually be able to do
>this
>> "correctly"?), compare to using the flags output from assembly.
>
>There is an advantage to using the intriniscs on arches with explicit
>barriers.  On powerpc64, for example, the compiler can move the release
>memory
>barrier earlier to push register-only instructions between the barrier
>and the
>lwarx.  This would allow the memory barrier to be executed concurrently
>with
>those instructions.
>
>The compiler could also move the acquire memory barrier later, pulling
>register-only instructions between the stwcx and that barrier, though I
>don't
>see any advantage to doing so.
>
>Whereas if the release barrier is in the same asm block as the lwarx,
>the
>compiler cannot do anything with it.
>
>
>Another advantage is that the compiler can switch between instruction
>variants
>automatically, allowing us to get rid of the size-based switch
>statements for
>things like cmpxchg().
>
>
>However, there's probably not a great deal of difference to be had if
>the
>inline asm codes the appropriate instruction in each case for something
>like
>x86*.  The emitted code ought to look the same.  The second biggest win
>for
>the intriniscs, I think, is the ability to ask the CMPXCHG instruction
>whether
>it actually did anything rather than comparing the result.  I added two
>variants, one that only returned the yes/no and one that passed back
>the value
>as well as the yes/no.
>
>David

The question for me is for things like lock patching that we do on x86...
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse brevity and formatting.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

cmpxchg and x86 flags output "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> - 2016-06-15 02:00 +0200
  Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-06-15 11:00 +0200
    Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> - 2016-06-17 00:30 +0200
      Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-06-21 11:10 +0200
        Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> - 2016-06-21 19:10 +0200
          Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-06-22 18:20 +0200
            Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> - 2016-06-22 18:40 +0200
              Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2016-06-22 19:20 +0200
                Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> - 2016-06-22 20:00 +0200
        Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> - 2016-06-21 19:40 +0200
          Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> - 2016-06-22 02:40 +0200
            Re: cmpxchg and x86 flags output David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-06-22 18:20 +0200

csiph-web