[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190107131350-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 13:16:50 -0500
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>,
linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/4] include/linux/compiler.h: allow memory operands
On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 05:54:27PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 03:57:54PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > We don't really care whether the variable is in-register
> > or in-memory. Relax the constraint accordingly.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
> > ---
> > include/linux/compiler.h | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/compiler.h b/include/linux/compiler.h
> > index 1ad367b4cd8d..6601d39e8c48 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/compiler.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
> > @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ void ftrace_likely_update(struct ftrace_likely_data *f, int val,
> > #ifndef OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR
> > /* Make the optimizer believe the variable can be manipulated arbitrarily. */
> > #define OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR(var) \
> > - __asm__ ("" : "=r" (var) : "0" (var))
> > + __asm__ ("" : "=rm" (var) : "0" (var))
> > #endif
>
> I think this can break for architectures with write-back addressing modes
> such as arm, where the "m" constraint is assumed to be evaluated precisely
> once in the asm block.
>
> Will
Thanks, I'll drop this patch.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists