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