RE: [PATCH v2] x86: modernize sync_bitops.h

[David Laight]

From: Jan Beulich
> Sent: 21 November 2018 13:03
> 
> >>> On 21.11.18 at 12:55, <David.Laight@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > From: Jan Beulich
> >> Sent: 21 November 2018 10:11
> >>
> >> Add missing insn suffixes and use rmwcc.h just like was (more or less)
> >> recently done for bitops.h as well.
> >
> > Why? bts (etc) on memory don't really have an 'operand size'.
> 
> Of course they do - depending on operand size they operate on
> 2-, 4-, or 8-byte quantities. When the second operand is a
> register, the suffix is redundant (but doesn't hurt), but when
> the second operand is an immediate, the assembler (in AT&T
> syntax) has no way of knowing what operand size you mean.

You need to RTFM.

Regardless of the 'operand size' the 'bit' instructions do a 32 bit aligned
32 bit wide read/modify/write cycle.

The 'operand size' does affect whether the bit number (which is signed)
comes from %cl (8 bits), %cx (16 bits), %rcx (32 bits) or (%ecx) 64 bits.
But that is implicit in the register name used.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)