Please someone review this patch.
Thanks,
Xin
On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Xin Tong <trent.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am planning to implement support for Intel RTM. similar to what is
> done for PowerPC. we can default to fault (transaction abort) to the
> fallback code path. Would like to check in this test case first.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 1:56 PM, <trent.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Add test case for intel restrict transactional memory. compiled with
>> Intel ICC 15.0 as well as GCC 4.8. This test case can be used to test
>> intel RTM support in the target-i386 frontend.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xin Tong <trent.t...@gmail.com>
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/tcg/test-intelrtm.c b/tests/tcg/test-intelrtm.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..ca1ce16
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/tests/tcg/test-intelrtm.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
>> +/****************************************************************************
>> +This file contains an example of Intel Restricted Transactional Memory
>> (RTM).
>> +In the example multiple threads are created to simulatenously increment
>> +elements in a shared array.
>> +
>> +This test case should be compiled with Intel ICC compiler as it uses ICC RTM
>> +intrnsics.
>> +****************************************************************************/
>> +#include <stdio.h>
>> +#include <pthread.h>
>> +#include <immintrin.h> /* _XBEGIN_START */
>> +
>> +#define ARRAY_SIZE 1024
>> +#define TESTTHREAD_COUNT 32
>> +/* lock for atomic access to the testarray */
>> +static pthread_mutex_t arraylock;
>> +static pthread_t *threadarray;
>> +static int testarray[ARRAY_SIZE];
>> +
>> +static void increment_func(void *arg)
>> +{
>> + int i;
>> + long int threadnum = (long int)arg;
>> + unsigned int status = _xbegin();
>> + if (status == _XBEGIN_STARTED) {
>> + /* test _xtest() and _xabort(). fallback path for odd-num thread */
>> + if (_xtest() && (threadnum % 2)) {
>> + _xabort(_XABORT_EXPLICIT);
>> + }
>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE; ++i) {
>> + testarray[i]++;
>> + }
>> + _xend();
>> + } else {
>> + /* fallback path. hold array lock */
>> + pthread_mutex_lock(&arraylock);
>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE; ++i) {
>> + testarray[i]++;
>> + }
>> + /* release array lock */
>> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&arraylock);
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void run_test(int threadcount)
>> +{
>> + int i;
>> + /* create the test threads */
>> + for (i = 0; i < threadcount; ++i) {
>> + pthread_create(&threadarray[i], NULL,
>> + (void *(*)(void *))increment_func, (void*)i);
>> + }
>> + /* wait for the test threads to finish */
>> + for (i = 0; i < threadcount; ++i) {
>> + pthread_join(threadarray[i], NULL);
>> + }
>> + /* print the end results of the array */
>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE; ++i) {
>> + printf("testarray[%d] is %d\n", i, testarray[i]);
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void run_setup(int threadcount)
>> +{
>> + /* allocate the pthread_t structures */
>> + threadarray = (pthread_t *) malloc(sizeof(pthread_t)*threadcount);
>> + /* initialize the arraylock mutex */
>> + if (pthread_mutex_init(&arraylock, NULL) != 0) {
>> + printf("arraylock mutex init failed. exiting ...\n");
>> + exit(-1);
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void run_cleanup(void)
>> +{
>> + free(threadarray);
>> + pthread_mutex_destroy(&arraylock);
>> +}
>> +
>> +int main(void)
>> +{
>> + run_setup(TESTTHREAD_COUNT);
>> + run_test(TESTTHREAD_COUNT);
>> + run_cleanup();
>> + return 0;
>> +}
