[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181101145926.GE3178@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 15:59:26 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>,
"linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
"paul.burton@...s.com" <paul.burton@...s.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"ralf@...ux-mips.org" <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
"jlayton@...nel.org" <jlayton@...nel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"bfields@...ldses.org" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
"linux-mips@...ux-mips.org" <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"anna.schumaker@...app.com" <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
"jhogan@...nel.org" <jhogan@...nel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"paulus@...ba.org" <paulus@...ba.org>,
"mpe@...erman.id.au" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"benh@...nel.crashing.org" <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] lib: Introduce generic __cmpxchg_u64() and use it
where needed
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:18:46PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > My one question (and the reason why I went with cmpxchg() in the first
> > place) would be about the overflow behaviour for atomic_fetch_inc() and
> > friends. I believe those functions should be OK on x86, so that when we
> > overflow the counter, it behaves like an unsigned value and wraps back
> > around. Is that the case for all architectures?
> >
> > i.e. are atomic_t/atomic64_t always guaranteed to behave like u32/u64
> > on increment?
> >
> > I could not find any documentation that explicitly stated that they
> > should.
>
> Peter, Will, I understand that the atomic_t/atomic64_t ops are required
> to wrap per 2's-complement. IIUC the refcount code relies on this.
>
> Can you confirm?
There is quite a bit of core code that hard assumes 2s-complement. Not
only for atomics but for any signed integer type. Also see the kernel
using -fno-strict-overflow which implies -fwrapv, which defines signed
overflow to behave like 2s-complement (and rids us of that particular
UB).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists