[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f2581b9f-9e0d-4db5-ee9d-a235bb0a1842@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:56:14 +0800
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 12/12] tools/virtio: fix smp_mb on x86
On 2018年01月26日 07:36, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Offset 128 overlaps the last word of the redzone.
> Use 132 which is always beyond that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
> ---
> tools/virtio/ringtest/main.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/virtio/ringtest/main.h b/tools/virtio/ringtest/main.h
> index 593a328..301d59b 100644
> --- a/tools/virtio/ringtest/main.h
> +++ b/tools/virtio/ringtest/main.h
> @@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ static inline void busy_wait(void)
> }
>
> #if defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__i386__)
> -#define smp_mb() asm volatile("lock; addl $0,-128(%%rsp)" ::: "memory", "cc")
Just wonder did "rsp" work for __i386__ ?
Thanks
> +#define smp_mb() asm volatile("lock; addl $0,-132(%%rsp)" ::: "memory", "cc")
> #else
> /*
> * Not using __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST since gcc docs say they are only synchronized
Powered by blists - more mailing lists