[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 17:44:01 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, daniel@...earbox.net,
peterz@...radead.org, arnd@...db.de, yang.shi@...aro.org,
linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
zlim.lnx@...il.com, ast@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, xi.wang@...il.com, catalin.marinas@....com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, yhs@...mgrid.com,
bblanco@...mgrid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: bpf: add BPF XADD instruction
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:35:48PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 09:27:00 -0800
>
> > BPF_XADD == atomic_add() in kernel. period.
> > we are not going to deprecate it or introduce something else.
>
> Agreed, it makes no sense to try and tie C99 or whatever atomic
> semantics to something that is already clearly defined to have
> exactly kernel atomic_add() semantics.
... and which is emitted by LLVM when asked to compile __sync_fetch_and_add,
which has clearly defined (yet conflicting) semantics.
If the discrepancy is in LLVM (and it sounds like it is), then I'll raise
a bug over there instead.
Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists