[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5998407c-3497-22c1-45dc-a86afcb73c94@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 12:33:24 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, zengzhaoxiu@....com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Zhaoxiu Zeng <zhaoxiu.zeng@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/hweight: Get rid of the special calling
convention
On 05/04/2016 12:31 PM, Brian Gerst wrote:
>>
>> - asm (ALTERNATIVE("call __sw_hweight32", POPCNT32, X86_FEATURE_POPCNT)
>> - : "="REG_OUT (res)
>> - : REG_IN (w));
>> + if (likely(static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_POPCNT))) {
>> + asm volatile("popcnt %[w], %[res]" : [res] "=r" (res) : [w] "r" (w));
>
> Do all supported versions of the assembler know of the popcnt
> instruction? That's why is was open coded before. The problem is
> Intel and AMD are constantly adding new instructions and it's a long
> cycle for the user's assembler to get updated.
>
Most likely not. It would be nice to have some more uniform solution to
that. I'm wondering if we could use the -Wa option to load some kind of
macro package.
-hpa
Powered by blists - more mailing lists