[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1101211146320.15692@router.home>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:50:29 -0600 (CST)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [cpuops cmpxchg double V2 1/4] Generic support for
this_cpu_cmpxchg_double
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > this_cpu_cmpxchg_double(percpu_dd, oldword1, oldword2, newword1, newword2)
> >
> > with the problem of type checking
>
> What is the problem with type checking here ?
You need to know the fields in the struct to do the type checking with
each of the other parameters.
> We could use a gcc builtin like the following to check if the alignment of
> "percpu_dd" meets the double-cas requirements:
>
> #define testmacro(a, b) \
> __builtin_choose_expr(__alignof__(a) >= 2 * sizeof(unsigned long), \
> ((a).low) = (b), \ /* success */
> ((a).low) = (void) 0) /* compile-error */
>
> > or
> >
> > this_cpu_cmpxchg_double(percpu_dd, old_dd, new_dd)
> >
> > with the problem of 128 bit constants/structs passed by value.
>
> Yeah, I guess trying to deal with 128-bit value might be a bit tricky. But
> having something sane and with compile-time-checked alignment for the percpu_dd
> type is not to be looked over.
The existing implementation could be equipped to do a compile time check
for the proper alignment if the pointer passed is constant.
--
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