On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 10:03:01PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> a écrit :
>
> >On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 8:21 PM 'Nick Desaulniers' via Clang Built
> >Linux <clang-built-li...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> >
> >> static inline void dcbz(void *addr)
> >> {
> >>- __asm__ __volatile__ ("dcbz %y0" : : "Z"(*(u8 *)addr) : "memory");
> >>+ __asm__ __volatile__ ("dcbz %y0" : "=Z"(*(u8 *)addr) :: "memory");
> >> }
> >>
> >> static inline void dcbi(void *addr)
> >> {
> >>- __asm__ __volatile__ ("dcbi %y0" : : "Z"(*(u8 *)addr) : "memory");
> >>+ __asm__ __volatile__ ("dcbi %y0" : "=Z"(*(u8 *)addr) :: "memory");
> >> }
> >
> >I think the result of the discussion was that an output argument only
> >kind-of
> >makes sense for dcbz, but for the others it's really an input, and clang is
> >wrong in the way it handles the "Z" constraint by making a copy, which it
> >doesn't do for "m".
> >
> >I'm not sure whether it's correct to use "m" instead of "Z" here, which
> >would be a better workaround if that works. More importantly though,
> >clang really needs to be fixed to handle "Z" correctly.
>
> As the benefit is null, I think the best is probably to reverse my
> original commit until at least CLang is fixed, as initialy suggested
> by mpe
And what about the other uses of "Z"?
Also, if you use C routines (instead of assembler code) for the basic
"clear a block" and the like routines, as there have been patches for
recently, the benefit is not zero.
Segher
