Re: [PATCH] x86_64/__iowrite32_copy: don't use string move for PIOwrites

[H. Peter Anvin]

John A. Gregor wrote:
> 
> Anyway, we're very likely going to have to stick with asm for X86_64 no
> matter how it gets implemented both for performance and as protection
> against the compiler generating a rep movs sequence.
> 
> So, I see at least a couple possible courses of action:
> 
> 1. Redefine __iowrite32_copy(), document it better, and take the
>    new asm.
> 2. Delete the .S file, warn about the possibility of the compiler
>    generating a rep movs sequence in the C code, and the ipath driver
>    will have a private copy routine again.
> 

I discussed this with H.J. Lu (x86 gcc maintainer), and he stated rather
unequivocally that gcc will not generate string instructions for a
volatile store, and that the gcc team considers that part of the
definition for volatile.  So the C version is guaranteed to be good; we
should just remove the assembly version.

Redefining a public API -- no matter if you were the original authors --
is not an option.  If you need something other than __iowrite32_copy()
or __iowrite64_copy() you should define a new API or make it a private
one.  Either which way, a C implementation is guaranteed to be safe.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/