search for: semantcs

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 06:25:21PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Which flag do you refer to, exactly? All the flags in rFLAGS which ADD modifies: OF,SF,ZF,AF,PF,CF -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.

...rrier.h didn't tell this to gcc. Historically, gcc doesn't need one on x86, and always considers flags clobbered. We are probably missing the cc clobber in a *lot* of places for this reason. But even if not necessary, it's probably a good thing to add for documentation, and in case gcc semantcs ever change. Reported-by: Borislav Petkov <bp at alien8.de> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> --- arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h | 9 ++++++--- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/barri...

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 06:25:21PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Which flag do you refer to, exactly? All the flags in rFLAGS which ADD modifies: OF,SF,ZF,AF,PF,CF -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.

mb() typically uses mfence on modern x86, but a micro-benchmark shows that it's 2 to 3 times slower than lock; addl that we use on older CPUs. So we really should use the locked variant everywhere, except that intel manual says that clflush is only ordered by mfence, so we can't. Note: some callers of clflush seems to assume sfence will order it, so there could be existing bugs around

mb() typically uses mfence on modern x86, but a micro-benchmark shows that it's 2 to 3 times slower than lock; addl that we use on older CPUs. So we really should use the locked variant everywhere, except that intel manual says that clflush is only ordered by mfence, so we can't. Note: some callers of clflush seems to assume sfence will order it, so there could be existing bugs around

mb() typically uses mfence on modern x86, but a micro-benchmark shows that it's 2 to 3 times slower than lock; addl that we use on older CPUs. So we really should use the locked variant everywhere, except that intel manual says that clflush is only ordered by mfence, so we can't. Note: some callers of clflush seems to assume sfence will order it, so there could be existing bugs around

mb() typically uses mfence on modern x86, but a micro-benchmark shows that it's 2 to 3 times slower than lock; addl that we use on older CPUs. So we really should use the locked variant everywhere, except that intel manual says that clflush is only ordered by mfence, so we can't. Note: some callers of clflush seems to assume sfence will order it, so there could be existing bugs around

mb() typically uses mfence on modern x86, but a micro-benchmark shows that it's 2 to 3 times slower than lock; addl that we use on older CPUs. So let's use the locked variant everywhere. While I was at it, I found some inconsistencies in comments in arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h The documentation fixes are included first - I verified that they do not change the generated code at all.

mb() typically uses mfence on modern x86, but a micro-benchmark shows that it's 2 to 3 times slower than lock; addl that we use on older CPUs. So let's use the locked variant everywhere. While I was at it, I found some inconsistencies in comments in arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h The documentation fixes are included first - I verified that they do not change the generated code at all.