Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 3 Sep 2019 13:31:57 -0500
From:   Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Cc:     "Alastair D'Silva" <alastair@au1.ibm.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, alastair@d-silva.org,
        Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Allison Randal <allison@lohutok.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] powerpc: Convert flush_icache_range & friends to C
Message-ID: <20190903183157.GB9749@gate.crashing.org>
References: <20190903052407.16638-1-alastair@au1.ibm.com> <20190903052407.16638-4-alastair@au1.ibm.com> <20190903130430.GC31406@gate.crashing.org> <d268ee78-607e-5eb3-ed89-d5c07f672046@c-s.fr> <20190903160415.GA9749@gate.crashing.org> <321b003a-9633-5ff4-c4a2-59a47ec23421@c-s.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <321b003a-9633-5ff4-c4a2-59a47ec23421@c-s.fr>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 07:05:19PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 03/09/2019 ? 18:04, Segher Boessenkool a ?crit?:
> >(Why are they separate though?  It could just be one loop var).
> 
> Yes it could just be a single loop var, but in that case it would have 
> to be reset at the start of the second loop, which means we would have 
> to pass 'addr' for resetting the loop anyway,

Right, I noticed that after hitting send, as usual.

> so I opted to do it 
> outside the inline asm by using to separate loop vars set to their 
> starting value outside the inline asm.

The thing is, the way it is written now, it will get separate registers
for each loop (with proper earlyclobbers added).  Not that that really
matters of course, it just feels wrong :-)


Segher