Re: [PATCH] make atomic_t volatile on all architectures

From: Segher Boessenkool
Date: Sun Aug 12 2007 - 01:55:41 EST


You'd have to use "+m".

Yes, though I would use "=m" on the output list and "m" on the input
list. The reason is that I've seen gcc fall on its face with an ICE on
s390 due to "+m". The explanation I've got from our compiler people was
quite esoteric, as far as I remember gcc splits "+m" to an input operand
and an output operand. Now it can happen that the compiler chooses two
different registers to access the same memory location. "+m" requires
that the two memory references are identical which causes the ICE if
they are not.

The problem is very nicely described here, last paragraph:
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-07/msg01816.html>

It's not a problem anymore in (very) recent GCC, although
that of course won't help you in the kernel (yet).

I do not know if the current compilers still do this. Has
anyone else seen this happen ?

In recent GCC, it's actually documented:

The ordinary output operands must be write-only; GCC will assume that
the values in these operands before the instruction are dead and need
not be generated. Extended asm supports input-output or read-write
operands. Use the constraint character `+' to indicate such an operand
and list it with the output operands. You should only use read-write
operands when the constraints for the operand (or the operand in which
only some of the bits are to be changed) allow a register.

Note that last line.


Segher

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/