[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100301084923.GG26848@brick.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 19:49:23 +1100
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Luca Barbieri <luca@...a-barbieri.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86-32: improve atomic64_t functions (v2)
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:35:31PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 02/26/2010 03:23 AM, Luca Barbieri wrote:
> > Sent patches, both to conditionally perform the test and implement the
> > functions for x86 and x86-64.
>
> Yes, and with the test turned on, the kernel crashes immediately on boot
> on x86-64.
>
> Some minor investigation reveals the following:
>
> lib/atomic64.c has the wrong return value for atomic64_add_unless().
> With "wrong" I mean it is the opposite sense compared to
> atomic_add_unless(), not just on x86 but on all architectures.
>
> Accordingly, I have to conclude that lib/atomic64.c is buggy, and that
> since your test matches that bug, I will have to conclude that your
> x86-32 implementation is also buggy. Thus, please send patches to fix
> your test and your 32-bit implementations (and preferrably
> lib/atomic64.c too, but I can do that just fine.)
>
> Cc: Paul Mackerras who did the generic atomic64_t implementation for
> verification that this is indeed a bug.
Yes, it sure looks like it. *blush*
Paul.
--
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