mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: "John A. Gregor" <john.gregor@qlogic.com>
Cc: ralph.campbell@qlogic.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64/__iowrite32_copy: don't use string move for PIO writes
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:46:02 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A53EC4A.1000403@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a537279./HlkzM7mavpN0Wx2%john.gregor@qlogic.com>

John A. Gregor wrote:
> 
> Anyway, we're very likely going to have to stick with asm for X86_64 no
> matter how it gets implemented both for performance and as protection
> against the compiler generating a rep movs sequence.
> 
> So, I see at least a couple possible courses of action:
> 
> 1. Redefine __iowrite32_copy(), document it better, and take the
>    new asm.
> 2. Delete the .S file, warn about the possibility of the compiler
>    generating a rep movs sequence in the C code, and the ipath driver
>    will have a private copy routine again.
> 

I discussed this with H.J. Lu (x86 gcc maintainer), and he stated rather
unequivocally that gcc will not generate string instructions for a
volatile store, and that the gcc team considers that part of the
definition for volatile.  So the C version is guaranteed to be good; we
should just remove the assembly version.

Redefining a public API -- no matter if you were the original authors --
is not an option.  If you need something other than __iowrite32_copy()
or __iowrite64_copy() you should define a new API or make it a private
one.  Either which way, a C implementation is guaranteed to be safe.

	-hpa

  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-08  0:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-06 19:07 John Gregor
2009-07-06 21:30 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-07-06 21:36   ` John A. Gregor
2009-07-06 22:47     ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-07-06 23:44       ` John A. Gregor
2009-07-07  0:03         ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-07-07 16:06           ` John A. Gregor
2009-07-08  0:46             ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2009-07-09 23:19       ` Pavel Machek
2009-07-10 15:07         ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-07-10 16:02           ` Lu, Hongjiu
2009-07-06 21:41   ` John A. Gregor

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4A53EC4A.1000403@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=john.gregor@qlogic.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ralph.campbell@qlogic.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome