[ plock commit 4c53fd3a0b2b1892817cebd0db012a52f4087850 ]
Pieter Baauw reported a build issue affecting haproxy after plock was
included. It happens that expressions of the form :
if ((const) ? (expr1) : (expr2))
do_something()
always produce code for both expr1 and expr2 on Clang when building
without optimization. The resulting asm code is even funny, basically
doing :
mov reg, 1
cmp reg, 1
...
This causes our sizeof() tests to fail to build because we purposely
dereference a fake function that reports the location and nature of the
inconsistency, but this fake function appears in the object code despite
all conditions being there to avoid it.
However the compiler is still smart enough to optimize away code doing
if (const)
do_something()
So we simply repeat the condition before do_something(), and the dummy
function is not referenced anymore unless really required.
[ plock commit 61e255286ae32e83e1a3174dd7c49eda99880a8b]
There are a few inlines such as pl_barrier() and pl_cpu_relax() which
are used a lot. Unfortunately, while building test code at -O0, inlining
is disabled and these ones are called a lot and show up a lot in any
profile, are traced into when single-stepping with a debugger, etc, thus
they are polluting the landscape. Since they're single-asm statements,
there is no reason for not turning them into macros.
The result becomes fairly visible here at -O0 :
$ size latency.inline latency.macro
text data bss dec hex filename
11431 692 656 12779 31eb treelock.inline
10967 692 656 12315 301b treelock.macro
And it was verified that regularly optimized code remains strictly identical.
[ plock commit 44081ea493dd78dab48076980e881748e9b33db5 ]
Older compilers (eg: gcc 3.4) don't provide __sync_synchronize() so let's
do it by hand on this platform.
[ plock commit bfac5887ebabb8ef753b0351f162265767eb219b ]
Local variable "t" was renamed "__pl_t" to limit the risk of conflicts
with existing variables in application code.
Willy Tarreau
Emeric Brun