From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=qW4V=JL=lists.ozlabs.org=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,
	SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F5B0C433ED
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 12:43:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D85061155
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 12:43:20 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3D85061155
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=csgroup.eu
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FL2Ff64Dtz3byG
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 22:43:18 +1000 (AEST)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized)
 smtp.mailfrom=csgroup.eu (client-ip=93.17.236.30; helo=pegase1.c-s.fr;
 envelope-from=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu; receiver=<UNKNOWN>)
Received: from pegase1.c-s.fr (pegase1.c-s.fr [93.17.236.30])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FL2FJ2hnxz2yZL
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 22:42:56 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from localhost (mailhub1-int [192.168.12.234])
 by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FL2F84yKmz9txVV;
 Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:42:52 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at c-s.fr
Received: from pegase1.c-s.fr ([192.168.12.234])
 by localhost (pegase1.c-s.fr [192.168.12.234]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id nM2lXP3VZmSI; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:42:52 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from messagerie.si.c-s.fr (messagerie.si.c-s.fr [192.168.25.192])
 by pegase1.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FL2F83Ygfz9txVT;
 Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:42:52 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by messagerie.si.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B6208B7C6;
 Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:42:53 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at c-s.fr
Received: from messagerie.si.c-s.fr ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (messagerie.si.c-s.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023)
 with ESMTP id G6vVtpZps7WL; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:42:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.4.90] (unknown [192.168.4.90])
 by messagerie.si.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F3858B7C0;
 Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:42:52 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] powerpc/bitops: Use immediate operand when possible
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
 Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
References: <09da6fec57792d6559d1ea64e00be9870b02dab4.1617896018.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
 <20210412215428.GM26583@gate.crashing.org>
 <ecb1b1a5-ae92-e8a3-6490-26341edfbccb@csgroup.eu>
 <20210413215803.GT26583@gate.crashing.org>
 <1618365589.67fxh7cot9.astroid@bobo.none>
 <20210414122409.GV26583@gate.crashing.org>
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Message-ID: <daacce9f-1900-1034-980b-be5a58d6be09@csgroup.eu>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:42:51 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210414122409.GV26583@gate.crashing.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Sender: "Linuxppc-dev"
 <linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org>



Le 14/04/2021 à 14:24, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 12:01:21PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> Would be nice if we could let the compiler deal with it all...
>>
>> static inline unsigned long lr(unsigned long *mem)
>> {
>>          unsigned long val;
>>
>>          /*
>>           * This doesn't clobber memory but want to avoid memory operations
>>           * moving ahead of it
>>           */
>>          asm volatile("ldarx     %0, %y1" : "=r"(val) : "Z"(*mem) : "memory");
>>
>>          return val;
>> }
> 
> (etc.)
> 
> That can not work reliably: the compiler can put random instructions
> between the larx and stcx. this way, and you then do not have guaranteed
> forward progress anymore.  It can put the two in different routines
> (after inlining and other interprocedural optimisations), duplicate
> them, make a different number of copies of them, etc.
> 
> Nothing of that is okay if you want to guarantee forward progress on all
> implementations, and also not if you want to have good performance
> everywhere (or anywhere even).  Unfortunately you have to write all
> larx/stcx. loops as one block of assembler, so that you know exactly
> what instructions will end up in your binary.
> 
> If you don't, it will fail mysteriously after random recompilations, or
> have performance degradations, etc.  You don't want to go there :-)
> 

Could the kernel use GCC builtin atomic functions instead ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/_005f_005fatomic-Builtins.html