On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Well the C++ test cases I wrote didn't work. It may be related to
> how complex the program is. Simple calls as in the original
> test suite seem to work.
>
> e.g. instead of xacquire lock and ... it ended up with a cmpxchg loop
> (which I thi
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> >> This cannot happen, we reject code that sets both __HLE* flags.
>> >
>> > BTW I found more HLE bugs, it looks like some of the fetch_op_*
>> > patterns do not match always and fall back to cmpxchg, which
>> > does not generate HLE code corre
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 07:40:56PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >> This cannot happen, we reject code that sets both __HLE* flags.
> >
> > BTW I found more HLE bugs, it looks like some of the fetch_op_*
> > patterns do not match always and fall b
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> This cannot happen, we reject code that sets both __HLE* flags.
>
> BTW I found more HLE bugs, it looks like some of the fetch_op_*
> patterns do not match always and fall back to cmpxchg, which
> does not generate HLE code correctly. Not fully
> This cannot happen, we reject code that sets both __HLE* flags.
Good thanks.
BTW I found more HLE bugs, it looks like some of the fetch_op_*
patterns do not match always and fall back to cmpxchg, which
does not generate HLE code correctly. Not fully sure what's
wrong, can you spot any obvious
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:29 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:23:24PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:12 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> >> >> +(define_insn "atomic_store_1"
>> >> >> + [(set (match_operand:ATOMIC 0 "memory_operand" "=m")
>> >> >> + (unspec
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:23:24PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:12 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >> >> +(define_insn "atomic_store_1"
> >> >> + [(set (match_operand:ATOMIC 0 "memory_operand" "=m")
> >> >> + (unspec:ATOMIC [(match_operand:ATOMIC 1 ""
> >> >> "")
> >> >> +
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:12 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> >> +(define_insn "atomic_store_1"
>> >> + [(set (match_operand:ATOMIC 0 "memory_operand" "=m")
>> >> + (unspec:ATOMIC [(match_operand:ATOMIC 1 ""
>> >> "")
>> >> + (match_operand:SI 2 "const_int_operand")]
>> >> +
> >> +(define_insn "atomic_store_1"
> >> + [(set (match_operand:ATOMIC 0 "memory_operand" "=m")
> >> + (unspec:ATOMIC [(match_operand:ATOMIC 1 ""
> >> "")
> >> + (match_operand:SI 2 "const_int_operand")]
> >> +UNSPEC_MOVA))]
> >> + ""
> >> + "%K2mov{}
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> > __atomic_clear and __atomic_store_n didn't have code to generate
>> > the TSX HLE RELEASE prefix. Add this plus test cases.
>>
>> +(define_insn "atomic_store_hle_release"
>> + [(set (match_operand:ATOMIC 0 "memory_operand")
>> + (unspec
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 08:59:15PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Hello!
>
> > __atomic_clear and __atomic_store_n didn't have code to generate
> > the TSX HLE RELEASE prefix. Add this plus test cases.
>
> +(define_insn "atomic_store_hle_release"
> + [(set (match_operand:ATOMIC 0 "memory_operand")
Hello!
> __atomic_clear and __atomic_store_n didn't have code to generate
> the TSX HLE RELEASE prefix. Add this plus test cases.
+(define_insn "atomic_store_hle_release"
+ [(set (match_operand:ATOMIC 0 "memory_operand")
+ (unspec:ATOMIC [(match_operand:ATOMIC 1 "register_operand")
+
From: Andi Kleen
__atomic_clear and __atomic_store_n didn't have code to generate
the TSX HLE RELEASE prefix. Add this plus test cases.
Right now it would need another target hook to check for someone
passing __ATOMIC_HLE_ACQUIRE to store/clear. I just ignore this
for now.
Passes bootstrap/test
13 matches
Mail list logo
