[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101124004441.GA8264@Krystal>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:44:41 -0500
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [thiscpuops upgrade 09/10] x86: this_cpu_cmpxchg and
this_cpu_cmpxchg_double operations
* Christoph Lameter (cl@...ux.com) wrote:
> Provide support as far as the hardware capabilities of the x86 cpus
> allow.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
>
[...]
> +#define percpu_cmpxchg16b(pcp, o1, o2, n1, n2) \
> +({ \
> + char __ret; \
> + typeof(o1) __o1 = o1; \
> + typeof(o1) __n1 = n1; \
> + typeof(o2) __o2 = o2; \
> + typeof(o2) __n2 = n2; \
> + asm("cmpxchg16b "__percpu_arg(1)"\n\tsetz %0\n\t" \
> + : "=a"(__ret), "=m" (*pcp) \
> + : "b"(__n1), "c"(__n2), "a"(__o1), "d"(__o2)); \
> + __ret; \
> +})
Can we add a check to ensure that the target memory location is 16-byte aligned?
This is a documented limitation of cmpxchg16b.
Thanks,
Mathieu
> +
> +#define __this_cpu_cmpxchg_double_8(pcp, o1, o2, n1, n2) percpu_cmpxchg16b((pcp), o1, o2, n1, n2)
> +#define this_cpu_cmpxchg_double_8(pcp, o1, o2, n1, n2) percpu_cmpxchg16b((pcp), o1, o2, n1, n2)
> +#define irqsafe_cmpxchg_double_8(pcp, o1, o2, n1, n2) percpu_cmpxchg16b((pcp), o1, o2, n1, n2)
> +
> #endif
>
> /* This is not atomic against other CPUs -- CPU preemption needs to be off */
>
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
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