[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B82E144.1050007@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:55:48 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
CC: Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>,
Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Add optimized popcnt variants
On 02/22/2010 10:49 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>
>> Just a note: this still means rdi is clobbered on x86-64, which is
>> probably fine, but needs to be recorded as such. Since gcc doesn't
>> support clobbers for registers used as operands (sigh), you have to
>> create a dummy output and assign it a "=D" constraint.
>>
>> I don't know if gcc would handle -fcall-saved-rdi here... and if so, how
>> reliably.
>
> Ok, from looking at kernel/sched.s output it looks like it saves rdi
> content over the alternative where needed. I'll do some more testing
> just to make sure.
>
No, you can't rely on behavioral observation. A different version of
gcc could behave differently. We need to make sure we tell gcc what the
requirements actually are, as opposed to thinking we can just fix them.
+#define POPCNT ".byte 0xf3\n\t.byte 0x48\n\t.byte 0x0f\n\t.byte
0xb8\n\t.byte 0xc7"
BTW, this can be written:
#define POPCNT ".byte 0xf3,0x48,0x0f,0xb8,0xc7"
-hpa
--
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