[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48038482.90500@goop.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 09:21:22 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] x86: bitops asm constraint fixes
Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> +struct __bits { int _[1UL << (32 - 3 - sizeof(int))]; };
>
I don't understand what you're doing here. The array can be 1<<(32 - 1)
bytes (assuming we never allow a 64-bit bit offset). The int array
makes that 1<<(32 - 1 - log2(sizeof(int))) ints. But I don't see what
the sizeof(int) is doing in there.
> +
> #if __GNUC__ < 4 || (__GNUC__ == 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ < 1)
> /* Technically wrong, but this avoids compilation errors on some gcc
> versions. */
> -#define ADDR "=m" (*(volatile long *)addr)
> -#define BIT_ADDR "=m" (((volatile int *)addr)[nr >> 5])
> +#define ADDR "=m" (*(volatile long *) addr)
> +#define BIT_ADDR "=m" (((volatile int *) addr)[nr >> 5])
> +#define FULL_ADDR "=m" (*(volatile struct __bits *) addr)
> #else
> #define ADDR "+m" (*(volatile long *) addr)
> -#define BIT_ADDR "+m" (((volatile int *)addr)[nr >> 5])
> +#define BIT_ADDR "+m" (((volatile int *) addr)[nr >> 5])
> +#define FULL_ADDR "+m" (*(volatile struct __bits *) addr)
> #endif
> -#define BASE_ADDR "m" (*(volatile int *)addr)
> +#define BASE_ADDR "m" (*(volatile int *) addr)
>
Shouldn't BASE_ADDR also use __bits? Otherwise it won't get write-read
dependencies right (a read could move before a write).
J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists