Skip to content
Commit 709f744f authored by Jan Beulich's avatar Jan Beulich Committed by Ingo Molnar
Browse files

x86: bitops asm constraint fixes



This (simplified) piece of code didn't behave as expected due to
incorrect constraints in some of the bitops functions, when
X86_FEATURE_xxx is referring to other than the first long:

int test(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) {
	if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_xxx))
		clear_cpu_cap(c, X86_FEATURE_xxx);
	return cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_xxx);
}

I'd really like understand, though, what the policy of (not) having a
"memory" clobber in these operations is - currently, this appears to
be totally inconsistent. Also, many comments of the non-atomic
functions say those may also be re-ordered - this contradicts the use
of "asm volatile" in there, which again I'd like to understand.

As much as all of these, using 'int' for the 'nr' parameter and
'void *' for the 'addr' one is in conflict with
Documentation/atomic_ops.txt, especially because bt{,c,r,s} indeed
take the bit index as signed (which hence would really need special
precaution) and access the full 32 bits (if 'unsigned long' was used
properly here, 64 bits for x86-64) pointed at, so invalid uses like
referencing a 'char' array cannot currently be caught.

Finally, the code with and without this patch relies heavily on the
-fno-strict-aliasing compiler switch and I'm not certain this really
is a good idea.

In the light of all of this I'm sending this as RFC, as fixing the
above might warrant a much bigger patch...

Signed-off-by: default avatarJan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
parent 6e908947
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment