Consider atomic_add and atomic_add_return in kernel code.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 2:59 AM, Ian Lance Taylor<iant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> kernel mailz <kernelmailz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> I tried a small example
>>
>> int *p = 0x1000;
>> int a = *p;
>> asm("sync":::"memory");
>> a = *p;
>>
>> and
>>
>> volatile int *p = 0x1000;
>> int a = *p;
>> asm("sync");
>> a = *p
>>
>> Got the same assembly.
>> Which is right.
>>
>> So does it mean, if proper use of volatile is done, there is no need
>> of "memory" ?
>
> You have to consider the effects of inlining, which may bring in other
> memory loads and stores through non-volatile pointers.
>
> Ian
>
Consider
static __inline__ void atomic_add(int a, atomic_t *v)
{
int t;
__asm__ __volatile__(
"1: lwarx %0,0,%3 # atomic_add\n\
add %0,%2,%0\n"
PPC405_ERR77(0,%3)
" stwcx. %0,0,%3 \n\
bne- 1b"
: "=&r" (t), "+m" (v->counter)
: "r" (a), "r" (&v->counter)
: "cc");
}
static __inline__ int atomic_add_return(int a, atomic_t *v)
{
int t;
__asm__ __volatile__(
LWSYNC_ON_SMP
"1: lwarx %0,0,%2 # atomic_add_return\n\
add %0,%1,%0\n"
PPC405_ERR77(0,%2)
" stwcx. %0,0,%2 \n\
bne- 1b"
ISYNC_ON_SMP
: "=&r" (t)
: "r" (a), "r" (&v->counter)
: "cc", "memory");
return t;
}
I am not able to figure out why "memory" is added in latter
-TZ
