Re: [PATCH] riscv/atomic: Do proper sign extension also for unsigned in arch_cmpxchg

[Andreas Schwab]

On Jan 30 2025, Jessica Clarke wrote:

> On 30 Jan 2025, at 15:53, Andreas Schwab <schwab@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>> On Jan 30 2025, Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
>> 
>>> a2 is used as it is passed by the calling function, so we can't be sure a2
>>> is sign extended to me, what am I missing?
>> 
>> 32-bit scalar arguments are guaranteed to be sign extended on entry.
>
> Firstly, the calling convention is irrelevant if the function is
> inlined, which this almost always will be.

This is only about the non-inlined variant.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@xxxxxxx
GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE  1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7
"And now for something completely different."