On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 2:36 AM Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
>
>
> HJ, Nick,
>
> Any chance any of you can see a way to make your respective compilers
> not emit utter junk for this?
>
> On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 10:14:45PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > https://godbolt.org/z/SDRG2q
Woah, a godbolt link! Now we're speaking the same language. What were
you expecting? Us to remove the conditional check that a volatile read
wasn't NULL? (Not using READ_ONCE, produces the direct tail call I
suspect you're looking for, but am unsure if that's what you meant,
and understand that's not a solution). I am simultaneously impressed
and disgusted by this btw, cool stuff.
i.e.
void *func = &name.func; \
rather than
void *func = READ_ONCE(name.func); \
(I'm surprised that `&name.func;` and `name.func;` also produce
different results).
> >
> > ---
> > #include <stddef.h>
> >
> >
> > #define READ_ONCE(var) (*((volatile typeof(var) *)&(var)))
> > #define WRITE_ONCE(var, val) (*((volatile typeof(var) *)&(var)) = (val))
> >
> > struct static_call_key {
> > void *func;
> > };
> >
> > #define DECLARE_STATIC_CALL(name, func) \
> > extern struct static_call_key name; \
> > extern typeof(func) __SCT__##name;
> >
> > #define DEFINE_STATIC_COND_CALL(name, _func) \
> > DECLARE_STATIC_CALL(name, _func) \
> > struct static_call_key name = { \
> > .func = NULL, \
> > }
> >
> > static void __static_call_nop(void)
> > {
> > }
> >
> > #define __static_cond_call(name) \
> > ({ \
> > void *func = READ_ONCE(name.func); \
> > if (!func) \
> > func = &__static_call_nop; \
> > (typeof(__SCT__##name)*)func; \
> > })
> >
> > #define static_cond_call(name) (void)__static_cond_call(name)
> >
> > static void inline static_call_update(struct static_call_key *call, void
> > *func)
> > {
> > WRITE_ONCE(call->func, func);
> > }
> >
> > volatile int _x;
> >
> > void bar(int x)
> > {
> > _x = x;
> > }
> >
> > DEFINE_STATIC_COND_CALL(foo, bar);
> >
> > void ponies(int x)
> > {
> > static_cond_call(foo)(x);
> > }
--
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers
