[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKwvOdnnP3cHZMjgV355r=OO7MDLmSoOoU_ch8+ByRaJEkF=rg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:49:51 -0700
From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To: Nathan Huckleberry <nhuck@...gle.com>
Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv/atomic: Fix sign extension for RV64I
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 11:34 AM 'Nathan Huckleberry' via Clang Built
Linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com> wrote:
>
> The argument passed to cmpxchg is not guaranteed to be sign
> extended, but lr.w sign extends on RV64I.
I had a hard time finding documentation on this sign extension. Is
lr.w just the atomic version of lw?
https://content.riscv.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/riscv-spec.pdf
pdf page 54, printed page 38 says:
The LW instruction loads a 32-bit value from memory and sign-extends
this to 64 bits before storing it in register rd for RV64I.
> This makes cmpxchg
> fail on clang built kernels when __old is negative.
>
> To fix this, we just cast __old to long which sign extends on
> RV64I. With this fix, clang built RISC-V kernels now boot.
Oh, indeed, nice! Thanks for digging into this issue, and sending the patch.
Tested-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> # QEMU boot, clang build
>
> Link: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/867
> Cc: clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
> Signed-off-by: Nathan Huckleberry <nhuck@...gle.com>
> ---
> arch/riscv/include/asm/cmpxchg.h | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/cmpxchg.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/cmpxchg.h
> index d969bab4a26b..262e5bbb2776 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/cmpxchg.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/cmpxchg.h
> @@ -179,7 +179,7 @@
> " bnez %1, 0b\n" \
> "1:\n" \
> : "=&r" (__ret), "=&r" (__rc), "+A" (*__ptr) \
> - : "rJ" (__old), "rJ" (__new) \
> + : "rJ" ((long)__old), "rJ" (__new) \
> : "memory"); \
> break; \
> case 8: \
> @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@
> RISCV_ACQUIRE_BARRIER \
> "1:\n" \
> : "=&r" (__ret), "=&r" (__rc), "+A" (*__ptr) \
> - : "rJ" (__old), "rJ" (__new) \
> + : "rJ" ((long)__old), "rJ" (__new) \
> : "memory"); \
> break; \
> case 8: \
> @@ -270,7 +270,7 @@
> " bnez %1, 0b\n" \
> "1:\n" \
> : "=&r" (__ret), "=&r" (__rc), "+A" (*__ptr) \
> - : "rJ" (__old), "rJ" (__new) \
> + : "rJ" ((long)__old), "rJ" (__new) \
> : "memory"); \
> break; \
> case 8: \
> @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@
> " fence rw, rw\n" \
> "1:\n" \
> : "=&r" (__ret), "=&r" (__rc), "+A" (*__ptr) \
> - : "rJ" (__old), "rJ" (__new) \
> + : "rJ" ((long)__old), "rJ" (__new) \
> : "memory"); \
> break; \
> case 8: \
> --
--
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists