[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190802081533.GE2332@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 10:15:33 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jing.lin@...el.com, bp@...en8.de, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/asm: Add support for MOVDIR64B instruction
On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 12:49:48PM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 10:43:48PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > > +static inline void movdir64b(void *dst, const void *src)
> > > +{
> > > + /* movdir64b [rdx], rax */
> > > + asm volatile(".byte 0x66, 0x0f, 0x38, 0xf8, 0x02"
> > > + : "=m" (*(char *)dst)
> > ^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > > + : "d" (src), "a" (dst));
> > > +}
> >
> > Probably needs fake 64-byte type, so that compiler knows what is dirty.
>
> Would that be something like this?
>
> static inline void movdir64b(void *dst, const void *src)
> {
> struct dstbytes {
> char pad[64];
> };
>
> /* movdir64b [rdx], rax */
> asm volatile(".byte 0x66, 0x0f, 0x38, 0xf8, 0x02"
> : "=m" (*(struct dstbytes *)dst)
> : "d" (src), "a" (dst));
> }
Can the source and destination overlap? The SDM doesn't seem to mention
this.
Also, it bugs me something fierce that this provides a
single-copy-atomic 64b store, but there is no matching load operation.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists