From 809f1d3e822988062856a6fd8ec8ca33a6c29932 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Rich Felker Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 18:23:24 -0400 Subject: fix microblaze atomic store as far as I can tell, microblaze is strongly ordered, but this does not seem to be well-documented and the assumption may need revisiting. even with strong ordering, however, a volatile C assignment is not sufficient to implement atomic store, since it does not preclude reordering by the compiler with respect to non-volatile stores and loads. simply flanking a C store with empty volatile asm blocks with memory clobbers would achieve the desired result, but is likely to result in worse code generation, since the address and value for the store may need to be spilled. actually writing the store in asm, so that there's only one asm block, should give optimal code generation while satisfying the requirement for having a compiler barrier. (cherry picked from commit 884cc0c7e253601b96902120ed689f34d12f8aa0) --- arch/microblaze/atomic.h | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'arch') diff --git a/arch/microblaze/atomic.h b/arch/microblaze/atomic.h index 90fcd8b6..da9949aa 100644 --- a/arch/microblaze/atomic.h +++ b/arch/microblaze/atomic.h @@ -95,7 +95,9 @@ static inline void a_dec(volatile int *x) static inline void a_store(volatile int *p, int x) { - *p=x; + __asm__ __volatile__ ( + "swi %1, %0" + : "=m"(*p) : "r"(x) : "memory" ); } static inline void a_spin() -- cgit 1.4.1