From: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>,
Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>,
gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>, java@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Provide a can_compare_and_swap_p target hook.
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2014 19:05:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <545BC666.5020007@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <545BBCA5.7060203@redhat.com>
On 11/06/2014 01:23 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 11/06/2014 05:57 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>> It looks like java is deciding whether or not GCC can inline atomic
>> operations or not, and if it can't, doesn't want the atomic
>> operations... which presumably means there is no dependency on
>> libatomic at runtime.
>>
>> A call to can_compare_and_swap_p(mode) is analogous to a compile time
>> version of folding atomic_always_lock_free(mode) to a constant...
>> Frankly that seems like a reasonable question for some front end to
>> ask... and elect not to emit atomic calls if so desired. (which is what
>> java is doing I think)
>>
>> whether it still needs to do that is a question for some java person.
> I did it because some targets did not have library support for some
> builtins, so a compile would fail with a (to a Java programmer)
> baffling error message.
>
> The Java operations certainly should use the generic builtins.
>
>
Thanks Andrew
1) Given that the compiler *always* provides support via libatomic now
(even if it is via locks), does that mean that VMSupportsCS8_builtin()
should always return true?
or should we map to that a call to __atomic_always_lock_free() ? (that
always gets folded to a true or false at compile time) my guess is the
latter?
2) and in compareAndSwapLong_builtin(), thre is a wonky bit:
/* We don't trust flag_use_atomic_builtins for multi-word compareAndSwap.
Some machines such as ARM have atomic libfuncs but not the multi-word
versions. */
if (can_compare_and_swap_p (mode,
(flag_use_atomic_builtins
&& GET_MODE_SIZE (mode) <= UNITS_PER_WORD)))
<..> /* generate 8 byte CAS */
I gather we dont need to do anything special here anymore either? As
an observation of inconsistency,
compareAndSwapObject_builtin doesn't do that check before calling the 8
byte CAS :
machine_mode mode = TYPE_MODE (ptr_type_node);
if (can_compare_and_swap_p (mode, flag_use_atomic_builtins))
{
tree addr, stmt;
enum built_in_function builtin;
UNMARSHAL5 (orig_call);
builtin = (POINTER_SIZE == 32
? BUILT_IN_SYNC_BOOL_COMPARE_AND_SWAP_4
: BUILT_IN_SYNC_BOOL_COMPARE_AND_SWAP_8);
addr = build_addr_sum (value_type, obj_arg, offset_arg);
3) And finally, is flag_use_atomic_builtins suppose to turn them off
completely? Right now it is passed in to the second parameter of
can_compare_and_swap_p, which really just says can we compare and swap
without calling a libfunc.. so currently if the flag is 0, but there
is native support, the call is generated anyway. should that condition
really be:
if (flag_use_atomic_builtins)
{
<...> /* generate atomic call */
}
Thanks
Andrew.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-06 19:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-04 16:28 Andrew MacLeod
2014-11-04 17:26 ` Richard Henderson
2014-11-04 17:56 ` Andrew MacLeod
2014-11-04 17:58 ` Richard Henderson
2014-11-04 18:30 ` Andrew MacLeod
2014-11-04 19:53 ` Richard Biener
2014-11-04 20:13 ` Andrew MacLeod
2014-11-06 17:57 ` Andrew MacLeod
2014-11-06 18:23 ` Andrew Haley
2014-11-06 19:05 ` Andrew MacLeod [this message]
2014-11-07 9:31 ` Andrew Haley
2014-11-07 13:31 ` Andrew MacLeod
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=545BC666.5020007@redhat.com \
--to=amacleod@redhat.com \
--cc=aph@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=java@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=rth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).