x86: simplify non-atomic bitops - being non-atomic, their pointer arguments shouldn't be volatile- qualified - their (half fake) memory operands can be a single "+m" instead of being both an output and an input Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/bitops.h +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/bitops.h @@ -53,12 +53,9 @@ static inline void set_bit(int nr, volat * If it's called on the same region of memory simultaneously, the effect * may be that only one operation succeeds. */ -static inline void __set_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr) +static inline void __set_bit(int nr, void *addr) { - asm volatile ( - "btsl %1,%0" - : "=m" (ADDR) - : "Ir" (nr), "m" (ADDR) : "memory"); + asm volatile ( "btsl %1,%0" : "+m" (ADDR) : "Ir" (nr) : "memory" ); } #define __set_bit(nr, addr) ({ \ if ( bitop_bad_size(addr) ) __bitop_bad_size(); \ @@ -93,12 +90,9 @@ static inline void clear_bit(int nr, vol * If it's called on the same region of memory simultaneously, the effect * may be that only one operation succeeds. */ -static inline void __clear_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr) +static inline void __clear_bit(int nr, void *addr) { - asm volatile ( - "btrl %1,%0" - : "=m" (ADDR) - : "Ir" (nr), "m" (ADDR) : "memory"); + asm volatile ( "btrl %1,%0" : "+m" (ADDR) : "Ir" (nr) : "memory" ); } #define __clear_bit(nr, addr) ({ \ if ( bitop_bad_size(addr) ) __bitop_bad_size(); \ @@ -114,12 +108,9 @@ static inline void __clear_bit(int nr, v * If it's called on the same region of memory simultaneously, the effect * may be that only one operation succeeds. */ -static inline void __change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr) +static inline void __change_bit(int nr, void *addr) { - asm volatile ( - "btcl %1,%0" - : "=m" (ADDR) - : "Ir" (nr), "m" (ADDR) : "memory"); + asm volatile ( "btcl %1,%0" : "+m" (ADDR) : "Ir" (nr) : "memory" ); } #define __change_bit(nr, addr) ({ \ if ( bitop_bad_size(addr) ) __bitop_bad_size(); \ @@ -179,14 +170,13 @@ static inline int test_and_set_bit(int n * If two examples of this operation race, one can appear to succeed * but actually fail. You must protect multiple accesses with a lock. */ -static inline int __test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr) +static inline int __test_and_set_bit(int nr, void *addr) { int oldbit; asm volatile ( "btsl %2,%1\n\tsbbl %0,%0" - : "=r" (oldbit), "=m" (ADDR) - : "Ir" (nr), "m" (ADDR) : "memory"); + : "=r" (oldbit), "+m" (ADDR) : "Ir" (nr) : "memory" ); return oldbit; } #define __test_and_set_bit(nr, addr) ({ \ @@ -226,14 +216,13 @@ static inline int test_and_clear_bit(int * If two examples of this operation race, one can appear to succeed * but actually fail. You must protect multiple accesses with a lock. */ -static inline int __test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr) +static inline int __test_and_clear_bit(int nr, void *addr) { int oldbit; asm volatile ( "btrl %2,%1\n\tsbbl %0,%0" - : "=r" (oldbit), "=m" (ADDR) - : "Ir" (nr), "m" (ADDR) : "memory"); + : "=r" (oldbit), "+m" (ADDR) : "Ir" (nr) : "memory" ); return oldbit; } #define __test_and_clear_bit(nr, addr) ({ \ @@ -242,14 +231,13 @@ static inline int __test_and_clear_bit(i }) /* WARNING: non atomic and it can be reordered! */ -static inline int __test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr) +static inline int __test_and_change_bit(int nr, void *addr) { int oldbit; asm volatile ( "btcl %2,%1\n\tsbbl %0,%0" - : "=r" (oldbit), "=m" (ADDR) - : "Ir" (nr), "m" (ADDR) : "memory"); + : "=r" (oldbit), "+m" (ADDR) : "Ir" (nr) : "memory" ); return oldbit; } #define __test_and_change_bit(nr, addr) ({ \