linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* ACPI global lock macros
@ 2003-12-09  9:22 Paul Menage
  2003-12-09  9:36 ` Arjan van de Ven
  2003-12-10  7:45 ` [ACPI] " Andi Kleen
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Menage @ 2003-12-09  9:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: agrover; +Cc: linux-kernel, acpi-devel

Hi Andy,

The ACPI_ACQUIRE_GLOBAL_LOCK() macro in include/asm-i386/acpi.h looks a 
little odd:

#define ACPI_ACQUIRE_GLOBAL_LOCK(GLptr, Acq) \
     do { \
         int dummy; \
         asm("1:     movl (%1),%%eax;" \
             "movl   %%eax,%%edx;" \
             "andl   %2,%%edx;" \
             "btsl   $0x1,%%edx;" \
             "adcl   $0x0,%%edx;" \
             "lock;  cmpxchgl %%edx,(%1);" \
             "jnz    1b;" \
             "cmpb   $0x3,%%dl;" \
             "sbbl   %%eax,%%eax" \
             :"=a"(Acq),"=c"(dummy):"c"(GLptr),"i"(~1L):"dx"); \
     } while(0)


When compiled, it results in:

  266:   mov    0x0,%ecx
                         268: R_386_32   acpi_gbl_common_fACS
  26c:   mov    (%ecx),%eax
  26e:   mov    %eax,%edx
  270:   and    %ecx,%edx
  272:   bts    $0x1,%edx
  276:   adc    $0x0,%edx
  279:   lock cmpxchg %edx,(%ecx)
  27d:   jne    26c <acpi_ev_acquire_global_lock+0x2f>
  27f:   cmp    $0x3,%dl
  282:   sbb    %eax,%eax

So at location 270 we mask %edx with %ecx, which is the address of the 
global lock. Unless the global lock is aligned on a 2-byte but not 
4-byte boundary, which seems a little unlikely, then this is going to 
clear both the owned and the pending bits in %edx, so we'll always think 
that the lock is not owned. Shouldn't the andl be masking with %3 (which 
is initialised as ~1) rather than %2 (the address of the lock)?

Given the comments above the definition, I'm guessing that the "dummy" 
parameter was added later for some reason (to tell gcc that ecx would 
get clobbered? - but it doesn't seem to be clobbered), and the parameter 
substitutions in the asm weren't updated. Unless I'm missing something 
fundamental, shouldn't the definition be something more like this:


#define ACPI_ACQUIRE_GLOBAL_LOCK(GLptr, Acq) \
     do { \
         asm volatile("1:movl   (%1),%%eax;" \
             "movl   %%eax,%%edx;" \
             "andl   %2,%%edx;" \
             "btsl   $0x1,%%edx;" \
             "adcl   $0x0,%%edx;" \
             "lock;  cmpxchgl %%edx,(%1);" \
             "jnz    1b;" \
             "cmpb   $0x3,%%dl;" \
             "sbbl   %0,%0" \
             :"=r"(Acq):"r"(GLptr),"i"(~1L):"dx", "ax"); \
     } while(0)

which compiles to:

  2e5:   mov    0x0,%ecx
                         2e7: R_386_32   acpi_gbl_common_fACS
  2eb:   mov    (%ecx),%eax
  2ed:   mov    %eax,%edx
  2ef:   and    $0xfffffffe,%edx
  2f2:   bts    $0x1,%edx
  2f6:   adc    $0x0,%edx
  2f9:   lock cmpxchg %edx,(%ecx)
  2fd:   jne    2eb <acpi_ev_acquire_global_lock+0x37>
  2ff:   cmp    $0x3,%dl
  302:   sbb    %cl,%cl


which is identical to the ACPI spec reference implementation, apart from 
returning the result in %cl rather than %al (since we're cleanly 
separating clobbered registers from input/output params, and letting gcc 
choose the param registers).

Alternatively it could be defined in C (as in ia64) which would reduce 
the likelihood of asm bugs. (Although it wouldn't be safe to use 
__cmpxchg(), as that uses LOCK_PREFIX which is empty on UP, rather than 
an explicit "lock").

ACPI_RELEASE_GLOBAL_LOCK(), and the x86_64 variants of these, seem to 
have similar issues.

Paul


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: ACPI global lock macros
  2003-12-09  9:22 ACPI global lock macros Paul Menage
@ 2003-12-09  9:36 ` Arjan van de Ven
  2003-12-09  9:42   ` Paul Menage
  2003-12-10  7:45 ` [ACPI] " Andi Kleen
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Arjan van de Ven @ 2003-12-09  9:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Menage; +Cc: agrover, linux-kernel, acpi-devel

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 269 bytes --]

On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 10:22, Paul Menage wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> 
> The ACPI_ACQUIRE_GLOBAL_LOCK() macro in include/asm-i386/acpi.h looks a 
> little odd:

maybe the odd thing is that it exists at all?
(eg why does ACPI need to have it's own locking primitives...)

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: ACPI global lock macros
  2003-12-09  9:36 ` Arjan van de Ven
@ 2003-12-09  9:42   ` Paul Menage
  2003-12-09  9:43     ` Arjan van de Ven
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Menage @ 2003-12-09  9:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: arjanv; +Cc: agrover, linux-kernel, acpi-devel

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 
> maybe the odd thing is that it exists at all?
> (eg why does ACPI need to have it's own locking primitives...)

Because the ACPI spec defines its own locking protocol for 
synchronization between the OS and the BIOS.

Paul


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: ACPI global lock macros
  2003-12-09  9:42   ` Paul Menage
@ 2003-12-09  9:43     ` Arjan van de Ven
  2003-12-09  9:50       ` Paul Menage
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Arjan van de Ven @ 2003-12-09  9:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Menage; +Cc: arjanv, agrover, linux-kernel, acpi-devel

On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 01:42:34AM -0800, Paul Menage wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >
> >maybe the odd thing is that it exists at all?
> >(eg why does ACPI need to have it's own locking primitives...)
> 
> Because the ACPI spec defines its own locking protocol for 
> synchronization between the OS and the BIOS.

... which can't be written based on linux locks ?

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: ACPI global lock macros
  2003-12-09  9:43     ` Arjan van de Ven
@ 2003-12-09  9:50       ` Paul Menage
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Menage @ 2003-12-09  9:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Arjan van de Ven; +Cc: agrover, linux-kernel, acpi-devel

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>>maybe the odd thing is that it exists at all?
>>>(eg why does ACPI need to have it's own locking primitives...)
>>
>>Because the ACPI spec defines its own locking protocol for 
>>synchronization between the OS and the BIOS.
> 
> 
> ... which can't be written based on linux locks ?

I assume (hope!) there's already a higher-level linux lock serializing 
access to acpi_acquire_global_lock() although I've not delved deeply 
into the code. This is the lock described on p112 of 
http://www.acpi.info/DOWNLOADS/ACPIspec-2-0c.pdf, which has the 
semantics that if the OS wants to take the lock while the BIOS holds it, 
it sets a bit and waits for an interrupt from the BIOS. I don't see that 
it could be naturally implemented using a linux lock.

Paul


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [ACPI] ACPI global lock macros
  2003-12-09  9:22 ACPI global lock macros Paul Menage
  2003-12-09  9:36 ` Arjan van de Ven
@ 2003-12-10  7:45 ` Andi Kleen
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andi Kleen @ 2003-12-10  7:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Paul Menage; +Cc: agrover, linux-kernel, acpi-devel

On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 01:22:09 -0800
Paul Menage <menage@google.com> wrote:

> Hi Andy,
> 
> The ACPI_ACQUIRE_GLOBAL_LOCK() macro in include/asm-i386/acpi.h looks a 
> little odd:

[...]

Thanks. I fixed the x86-64 version. RELEASE also needed similar treatment.


> Given the comments above the definition, I'm guessing that the "dummy" 
> parameter was added later for some reason (to tell gcc that ecx would 
> get clobbered? - but it doesn't seem to be clobbered), and the parameter 
> substitutions in the asm weren't updated. Unless I'm missing something 
> fundamental, shouldn't the definition be something more like this:

Numeric asm parameters are always evil and cause such bugs all the time. 
gcc 3.2+ has named asm parameters which makes this much cleaner and less error prone. 
Unfortunately they cannot be used in i386 because there are still people who insist 
on using ancient compilers :-(

-Andi


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2003-12-10  7:45 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-12-09  9:22 ACPI global lock macros Paul Menage
2003-12-09  9:36 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-12-09  9:42   ` Paul Menage
2003-12-09  9:43     ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-12-09  9:50       ` Paul Menage
2003-12-10  7:45 ` [ACPI] " Andi Kleen

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).