From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751379AbeEGGu2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 May 2018 02:50:28 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f195.google.com ([209.85.128.195]:41807 "EHLO mail-wr0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750937AbeEGGuZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 May 2018 02:50:25 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZr/e6vwd9eWPiZ0xZhwrltXEZaLskGy9iAtxDin5BNgvNZriTWeYyyW7IpjY574PgMT5UebGg== Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 08:50:21 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Boqun Feng Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Mark Rutland , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aryabinin@virtuozzo.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, dvyukov@google.com, will.deacon@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/atomics/powerpc: Move cmpxchg helpers to asm/cmpxchg.h and define the full set of cmpxchg APIs Message-ID: <20180507065021.s63ndzpjq4pg4a74@gmail.com> References: <20180505084721.GA32344@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180505090403.p2ywuen42rnlwizq@gmail.com> <20180505093829.xfylnedwd5nonhae@gmail.com> <20180505101609.5wb56j4mspjkokmw@tardis> <20180505103550.s7xsnto7tgppkmle@gmail.com> <20180505112817.ihrb726i37bwm4cj@tardis> <20180505132751.gwzu2vbzibr2risd@gmail.com> <20180505140340.uzfhoc42xvas4m72@tardis> <20180506121129.baacc4fxgr72rzex@gmail.com> <1525655045.499830.1362901928.0EBFEACA@webmail.messagingengine.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1525655045.499830.1362901928.0EBFEACA@webmail.messagingengine.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Boqun Feng wrote: > > > On Sun, May 6, 2018, at 8:11 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Boqun Feng wrote: > > > > > > The only change I made beyond a trivial build fix is that I also added the release > > > > atomics variants explicitly: > > > > > > > > +#define atomic_cmpxchg_release(v, o, n) \ > > > > + cmpxchg_release(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) > > > > +#define atomic64_cmpxchg_release(v, o, n) \ > > > > + cmpxchg_release(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) > > > > > > > > It has passed a PowerPC cross-build test here, but no runtime tests. > > > > > > > > > > Do you have the commit at any branch in tip tree? I could pull it and > > > cross-build and check the assembly code of lib/atomic64_test.c, that way > > > I could verify whether we mess something up. > > > > > > > Does this patch look good to you? > > > > > > > > > > Yep! > > > > Great - I have pushed the commits out into the locking tree, they can be > > found in: > > > > git fetch git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git > > locking/core > > > > Thanks! My compile test told me that we need to remove the definitions of > atomic_xchg and atomic64_xchg in ppc's asm/atomic.h: they are now > duplicate, and will prevent the generation of _release and _acquire in the > new logic. > > If you need a updated patch for this from me, I could send later today. > (I don't have a handy environment for patch sending now, so...) That would be cool, thanks! My own cross-build testing didn't trigger that build failure. > Other than this, the modification looks fine, the lib/atomic64_test.c > generated the same asm before and after the patches. Cool, thanks for checking! Thanks, Ingo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mingo@kernel.org (Ingo Molnar) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 08:50:21 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] locking/atomics/powerpc: Move cmpxchg helpers to asm/cmpxchg.h and define the full set of cmpxchg APIs In-Reply-To: <1525655045.499830.1362901928.0EBFEACA@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <20180505084721.GA32344@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180505090403.p2ywuen42rnlwizq@gmail.com> <20180505093829.xfylnedwd5nonhae@gmail.com> <20180505101609.5wb56j4mspjkokmw@tardis> <20180505103550.s7xsnto7tgppkmle@gmail.com> <20180505112817.ihrb726i37bwm4cj@tardis> <20180505132751.gwzu2vbzibr2risd@gmail.com> <20180505140340.uzfhoc42xvas4m72@tardis> <20180506121129.baacc4fxgr72rzex@gmail.com> <1525655045.499830.1362901928.0EBFEACA@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <20180507065021.s63ndzpjq4pg4a74@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Boqun Feng wrote: > > > On Sun, May 6, 2018, at 8:11 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Boqun Feng wrote: > > > > > > The only change I made beyond a trivial build fix is that I also added the release > > > > atomics variants explicitly: > > > > > > > > +#define atomic_cmpxchg_release(v, o, n) \ > > > > + cmpxchg_release(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) > > > > +#define atomic64_cmpxchg_release(v, o, n) \ > > > > + cmpxchg_release(&((v)->counter), (o), (n)) > > > > > > > > It has passed a PowerPC cross-build test here, but no runtime tests. > > > > > > > > > > Do you have the commit at any branch in tip tree? I could pull it and > > > cross-build and check the assembly code of lib/atomic64_test.c, that way > > > I could verify whether we mess something up. > > > > > > > Does this patch look good to you? > > > > > > > > > > Yep! > > > > Great - I have pushed the commits out into the locking tree, they can be > > found in: > > > > git fetch git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git > > locking/core > > > > Thanks! My compile test told me that we need to remove the definitions of > atomic_xchg and atomic64_xchg in ppc's asm/atomic.h: they are now > duplicate, and will prevent the generation of _release and _acquire in the > new logic. > > If you need a updated patch for this from me, I could send later today. > (I don't have a handy environment for patch sending now, so...) That would be cool, thanks! My own cross-build testing didn't trigger that build failure. > Other than this, the modification looks fine, the lib/atomic64_test.c > generated the same asm before and after the patches. Cool, thanks for checking! Thanks, Ingo