From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/7734 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alexander Monakov Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Refactoring atomics as llsc? Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 15:21:21 +0300 (MSK) Message-ID: References: <20150520051108.GA28347@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150521041237.GC17573@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150521120611.GO11258@port70.net> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1432210902 11680 80.91.229.3 (21 May 2015 12:21:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 12:21:42 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-7746-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu May 21 14:21:38 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YvPTi-0005LL-Lr for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 May 2015 14:21:34 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 5343 invoked by uid 550); 21 May 2015 12:21:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 5323 invoked from network); 21 May 2015 12:21:32 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20150521120611.GO11258@port70.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LNX 23 2013-08-11) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:7734 Archived-At: On Thu, 21 May 2015, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > Fortunately, there seems to be a clean solution: load them via asm > > that looks like > > > > static inline int v6_compat() { > > int r; > > __asm__ ( "..." : "=r"(r) ); > > return r; > > } > > > > where the "..." is asm to perform the load. Since this asm is not > > volatile and has no inputs, it can be CSE'd and treated like an > > attribute-const function. Strictly speaking this doesn't prevent > > reordering to the very beginning of program execution, before the > > runtime atomic selection is initialized, but I don't think that's a > > serious practical concern. It's certainly not a concern with dynamic > > linking since nothing can be reordered back into dynamic-linker-time, > > and the atomics would be initialized there. For static-linking LTO > > this may require some more thought for formal correctness. > > does gcc cse that? > > why is it guaranteed that r will be always the same? The asm is not volatile, so the compiler can use its constraints to move it like any other instruction. In this case there's only one input and output register, and no clobbers. > (and how can gcc know the cost of the asm? it seems to > me that would be needed to determine if it's worth keeping > r in a reg or just rerun the asm every time) While obviously any sort of exact cost can not be known, GCC uses the line count of the asm, iirc, as an estimation of the number of instructions. Alexander