On 05/26/2011 08:37 PM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> On Thu, 26 May 2011 13:48:13 -0400
> Paul Koning wrote:
>
>> Relax? Weird. "Pause" is just as weird. It might be an ia32 instruction,
>> so as an ia32 builtin it is a reasonable name But if you want a generic
>> builtin, you need a name
On Thu, 26 May 2011 13:48:13 -0400
Paul Koning wrote:
> Relax? Weird. "Pause" is just as weird. It might be an ia32 instruction,
> so as an ia32 builtin it is a reasonable name But if you want a generic
> builtin, you need a name that actually has some plausible connection with
> what it d
> Relax? Weird. "Pause" is just as weird. It might be an ia32 instruction,
> so as an ia32 builtin it is a reasonable name But if you want a generic
> builtin, you need a name that actually has some plausible connection with
> what it does, and neither "pause" nor "relax" do that.
It's a sh
On May 26, 2011, at 1:37 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 06:46:39PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 09:10:32AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> Richard Guenther writes:
>>> As for why having a builtin: one reason would be portability.
>>
>> You mean portabilit
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 06:46:39PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 09:10:32AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Richard Guenther writes:
> > As for why having a builtin: one reason would be portability.
>
> You mean portability to other compilers (I think reasonable amount
> of t
On Thu, 26 May 2011 09:12:06 -0700
Andi Kleen wrote:
> Basile Starynkevitch writes:
> >
> > Perhaps the doc might explain why is it necessary to have a builtin for
> > two independent roles: first, the full compiler memory barrier (which
> > probably means to spill all the registers on the stack
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 09:10:32AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Richard Guenther writes:
> As for why having a builtin: one reason would be portability.
You mean portability to other compilers (I think reasonable amount
of them support gcc-ish inline asm), or to other architectures?
__builtin_ia32_
Basile Starynkevitch writes:
>
> Perhaps the doc might explain why is it necessary to have a builtin for
> two independent roles: first, the full compiler memory barrier (which
> probably means to spill all the registers on the stack - definitely a
> task for a compiler); second, to "pause" the pr
Richard Guenther writes:
>
> To make it a compiler memory barrier you have to "expand" the
> builtin already in the frontend and present the middle-end with
> __asm__ ("" : : : "memory"). That will serve as a compiler
Those are the intended semantics (at least those I asked
for :-). For all
Hi,
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Andrew Haley wrote:
> >>> +Generates the @code{pause} machine instruction.
> >>
> >> But that's missing the fact that it generates a compiler memory
> >> barrier, which is important. And if you think it's not a compiler
> >> memory barrier, please explain
> >>
> >> a.
On 05/26/2011 03:29 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 05/26/2011 02:51 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 05/26/2011 10:34 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> Index: doc/extend.tex
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 04:29:50PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> To make it a compiler memory barrier you have to "expand" the
>> builtin already in the frontend and present the middle-end with
>> __asm__ ("" : : : "memory"). That wi
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 04:29:50PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> To make it a compiler memory barrier you have to "expand" the
> builtin already in the frontend and present the middle-end with
> __asm__ ("" : : : "memory"). That will serve as a compiler
> memory barrier also covering local
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/26/2011 02:51 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> On 05/26/2011 10:34 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>>
> Index: doc/extend.texi
> ===
On 05/26/2011 02:51 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 05/26/2011 10:34 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>
Index: doc/extend.texi
===
--- doc/extend.texi (revision 1
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/26/2011 10:34 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>>> Index: doc/extend.texi
>>> ===
>>> --- doc/extend.texi (revision 174216)
>>> +++ doc/extend.texi (working copy)
>>> @
On 05/26/2011 10:34 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> Index: doc/extend.texi
>> ===
>> --- doc/extend.texi (revision 174216)
>> +++ doc/extend.texi (working copy)
>> @@ -8699,7 +8699,8 @@ The following built-in function is alway
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:19 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 05/25/2011 04:32 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Richard Guenther
>>> wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On We
On 25/05/11 20:17, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2011 11:26:51 +0100
> Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>> On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>>> This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
>>> for trunk?
>>
>> What does "full memory barrier" here mean?
>>
>> +@table @
On Wed, 25 May 2011 12:31:17 -0700
"H.J. Lu" wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Basile Starynkevitch
> wrote:
> > Perhaps the doc might explain why is it necessary to have a builtin for
> > two independent roles: first, the full compiler memory barrier (which
> > probably means to spill
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2011 11:26:51 +0100
> Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>> On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> > This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
>> > for trunk?
>>
>> What does "full memory barrier" here mean
On Wed, 25 May 2011 11:26:51 +0100
Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> > This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
> > for trunk?
>
> What does "full memory barrier" here mean?
>
> +@table @code
> +@item void __builtin_ia32_pause (void)
> +Genera
On 05/25/2011 06:26 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 10:19 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> --
>> H.J.
>> ---
>> Index: doc/extend.texi
>> ===
>> --- doc/extend.texi (revision 174216)
>> +++ doc/extend.texi (working cop
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 10:19 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> --
> H.J.
> ---
> Index: doc/extend.texi
> ===
> --- doc/extend.texi (revision 174216)
> +++ doc/extend.texi (working copy)
> @@ -8699,7 +8699,8 @@ The following built-in func
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/25/2011 04:32 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Richard Guenther
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 25 May 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>> asm v
On 05/25/2011 04:32 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Richard Guenther
> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, 25 May 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>>
>> asm volatile ("" : : : "memory") in fact will work as a full memory
>
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, 25 May 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>
>>> >> asm volatile ("" : : : "memory") in fact will work as a full memory
>>> >> barrier
>>> >
>>> > How? You surely need
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 25 May 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> >> asm volatile ("" : : : "memory") in fact will work as a full memory
>> >> barrier
>> >
>> > How? You surely need MFENCE or somesuch, unless all you care about is
>> > a compiler bar
Hi,
On Wed, 25 May 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >> asm volatile ("" : : : "memory") in fact will work as a full memory
> >> barrier
> >
> > How? You surely need MFENCE or somesuch, unless all you care about is
> > a compiler barrier. That's what I think needs to be clarified.
>
> Well, ye
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/25/2011 03:57 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>
>> asm volatile ("" : : : "memory") in fact will work as a full memory barrier
>
> How? You surely need MFENCE or somesuch, unless all you
> care about is a compiler barrier. That's what I t
On 05/25/2011 03:57 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> asm volatile ("" : : : "memory") in fact will work as a full memory barrier
How? You surely need MFENCE or somesuch, unless all you
care about is a compiler barrier. That's what I think needs
to be clarified.
Andrew.
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/25/2011 03:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> On 05/25/2011 01:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On 05/25/2011 03:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 05/25/2011 01:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested b
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 4:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 05/25/2011 01:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> This patch implements pause intrinsic s
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/25/2011 01:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>
This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
for trunk?
>>>
>>> What does
On 05/25/2011 01:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>>> This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
>>> for trunk?
>>
>> What does "full memory barrier" here mean?
>>
>> +@table @code
>> +@item
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 8:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
> for trunk?
> gcc/
>
> 2011-05-24 H.J. Lu
>
> * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_builtins): Add IX86_BUILTIN_PAUSE.
> (bdesc_special_args): Add pause intrinsic.
>
> * c
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:31 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>>> This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
>>> for trunk?
>>
>> What does "full memory barrier" here mean?
>>
>> +@ta
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
>> for trunk?
>
> What does "full memory barrier" here mean?
>
> +@table @code
> +@item void __builtin_ia32_pause (void)
> +Generates the
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
>> for trunk?
>
> What does "full memory barrier" here mean?
>
> +@table @code
> +@item void __builtin_ia32_pause (void)
> +Generates the
On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
> for trunk?
What does "full memory barrier" here mean?
+@table @code
+@item void __builtin_ia32_pause (void)
+Generates the @code{pause} machine instruction with full memory barrier.
+@end tabl
Hi,
This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
for trunk?
Thanks.
--
H.J.
---
gcc/
2011-05-24 H.J. Lu
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_builtins): Add IX86_BUILTIN_PAUSE.
(bdesc_special_args): Add pause intrinsic.
* config/i386/i386.md (UNSPEC_PAUSE): N
42 matches
Mail list logo
