Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] KVM: Avoid using vmx instruction directly

[Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>]

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Like "volatile" variables, I think "asm volatile" is probably overused.
> If you want to guarantee specific ordering of asms, it's probably better
> to add an explicit dependency between them rather than rely on asm
> volatile; this could either be a "memory" clobber, or something more
> fine-grained.  For example:
>
>     /* need never be instansiated; never actually referenced */
>     extern int spin_sequencer;
>
>     /* %0 never referenced */
>     asm("take spinlock" : "+m" (spin_sequencer)...);
>
>     ...
>
>     /* again, %0 never referenced */
>     asm("release spinlock" : "+m" (spin_sequencer)...);

Very interesting.

Will it work on load/store architectures?  Since all memory access is 
through a register, won't the constraint generate a useless register 
load (and a use of the variable)?


--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/