similar to: [LLVMdev] dmb ishld in AArch64

Displaying 17 results from an estimated 17 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] dmb ishld in AArch64"

2014 Dec 09
2
[LLVMdev] dmb ishld in AArch64
Hi Tim, > That barrier should be treated the same as any other dmb by LLVM. What > I'm most confused about is why it's there in the first place. From > what I can tell, the rcu_assign_pointer function should map to a > native store-release operation (stlr). I guess it's because we disabled the integrated-asm, so it won't complain when compiling the kernel. > Also,
2014 Dec 10
2
[LLVMdev] dmb ishld in AArch64
I'm using r223407. Switching to a clean built on r223853, it still gives me: ldr x8, [x21,#8] stp x21, x8, [x19] dmb ishst ldr x8, [x19,#8] str x19, [x8] str x19, [x21,#8] Thanks, Chengyu > On Dec 9, 2014, at 6:32 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 9 December 2014 at 15:14, Chengyu Song <csong84 at gatech.edu> wrote:
2014 Dec 09
4
[LLVMdev] dmb ishld in AArch64
I'm not sure, I was never able to compile the whole kernel with -O0, too many errors. Plus, the problem seems to be within machine code generation. I tried opt -O1 and -O2, the generated .ll file does not diff much for the target function (insert_leaf_info). Thanks, Chengyu > On Dec 9, 2014, at 4:49 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 9 December 2014
2014 Aug 15
2
[LLVMdev] Plan to optimize atomics in LLVM
> From my reading of Atomics.rst, it would be sound to reorder (It does not > say much about load-linked, so I am treating it as a normal load here) > >> store seq_cst >> fence release >> load-linked monotonic > > into > >> load-linked monotonic >> store seq_cst >> fence release > Which would make an execution ending in %old_x = %old_y = 0
2014 Aug 08
6
[LLVMdev] Plan to optimize atomics in LLVM
> I am planning in doing in IR, but with target specific-passes (such as X86ExpandAtomicPass) > that just share some of the code This would more normally be done via target hooks in LLVM, though the principle is sound. > But it must be target-dependent as for example on Power a > seq_cst store has a fence before it, while on ARM it has a fence > both before and after it (per
2015 Dec 30
46
[PATCH 00/34] arch: barrier cleanup + __smp_XXX barriers for virt
This is really trying to cleanup some virt code, as suggested by Peter, who said > You could of course go fix that instead of mutilating things into > sort-of functional state. This work is needed for virtio, so it's probably easiest to merge it through my tree - is this fine by everyone? Arnd, if you agree, could you ack this please? Note to arch maintainers: please don't
2015 Dec 30
46
[PATCH 00/34] arch: barrier cleanup + __smp_XXX barriers for virt
This is really trying to cleanup some virt code, as suggested by Peter, who said > You could of course go fix that instead of mutilating things into > sort-of functional state. This work is needed for virtio, so it's probably easiest to merge it through my tree - is this fine by everyone? Arnd, if you agree, could you ack this please? Note to arch maintainers: please don't
2016 Jan 10
48
[PATCH v3 00/41] arch: barrier cleanup + barriers for virt
Changes since v2: - extended checkpatch tests for barriers, and added patches teaching it to warn about incorrect usage of barriers (__smp_xxx barriers are for use by asm-generic code only), should help prevent misuse by arch code to address comments by Russell King - patched more instances of xen to use virt_ barriers as suggested by Stefano Stabellini - implemented a 2 byte xchg on sh
2016 Jan 10
48
[PATCH v3 00/41] arch: barrier cleanup + barriers for virt
Changes since v2: - extended checkpatch tests for barriers, and added patches teaching it to warn about incorrect usage of barriers (__smp_xxx barriers are for use by asm-generic code only), should help prevent misuse by arch code to address comments by Russell King - patched more instances of xen to use virt_ barriers as suggested by Stefano Stabellini - implemented a 2 byte xchg on sh
2015 Dec 31
54
[PATCH v2 00/34] arch: barrier cleanup + barriers for virt
Changes since v1: - replaced my asm-generic patch with an equivalent patch already in tip - add wrappers with virt_ prefix for better code annotation, as suggested by David Miller - dropped XXX in patch names as this makes vger choke, Cc all relevant mailing lists on all patches (not personal email, as the list becomes too long then) I parked this in vhost tree for now, but the
2015 Dec 31
54
[PATCH v2 00/34] arch: barrier cleanup + barriers for virt
Changes since v1: - replaced my asm-generic patch with an equivalent patch already in tip - add wrappers with virt_ prefix for better code annotation, as suggested by David Miller - dropped XXX in patch names as this makes vger choke, Cc all relevant mailing lists on all patches (not personal email, as the list becomes too long then) I parked this in vhost tree for now, but the
2015 Dec 31
0
[PATCH v2 17/32] arm: define __smp_xxx
This defines __smp_xxx barriers for arm, for use by virtualization. smp_xxx barriers are removed as they are defined correctly by asm-generic/barriers.h This reduces the amount of arch-specific boiler-plate code. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> --- arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h | 12 +++--------- 1 file changed, 3
2015 Dec 31
0
[PATCH v2 08/32] arm: reuse asm-generic/barrier.h
On arm smp_store_mb, read_barrier_depends, smp_read_barrier_depends, smp_store_release, smp_load_acquire, smp_mb__before_atomic and smp_mb__after_atomic match the asm-generic variants exactly. Drop the local definitions and pull in asm-generic/barrier.h instead. This is in preparation to refactoring this code area. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> Acked-by: Arnd
2014 Dec 09
2
[LLVMdev] dmb ishld in AArch64
> On Dec 9, 2014, at 3:45 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I guess it's because we disabled the integrated-asm, so it won't complain when compiling the kernel. > > No, it's something different. The inline assembly (for whatever > reason) says to use a "dmb ishst" rather than an "stlr". I don't > actually
2014 Dec 10
2
[LLVMdev] dmb ishld in AArch64
>> Switching to a clean built on r223853, it still gives me: >> >> ldr x8, [x21,#8] >> stp x21, x8, [x19] >> dmb ishst >> ldr x8, [x19,#8] >> str x19, [x8] >> str x19, [x21,#8] > > Isn't that correct though? The problematic "str" has been folded into > the "stp" instruction, so "x19 + 8"
2013 Jan 23
132
[PATCH 00/45] initial arm v8 (64-bit) support
First off, Apologies for the massive patch series... This series boots a 32-bit dom0 kernel to a command prompt on an ARMv8 (AArch64) model. The kernel is the same one as I am currently using with the 32 bit hypervisor I haven''t yet tried starting a guest or anything super advanced like that ;-). Also there is not real support for 64-bit domains at all, although in one or two places I
2006 Jul 26
5
linux-2.6-xen.hg
Hi, Is the http://xenbits.xensource.com/linux-2.6-xen.hg tree still being updated? if not, what''s the preferred Linux tree to track that has all of the Xen bits? Thanks, Muli _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel