From: Jan Beulich In addition to these changes I doubt the 'volatile' on all the ticket lock asm()-s are really necessary. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Cc: Nick Piggin Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton --- include/asm-x86/spinlock.h | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff -puN include/asm-x86/spinlock.h~x86-fix-ticket-spin-lock-asm-constraints include/asm-x86/spinlock.h --- a/include/asm-x86/spinlock.h~x86-fix-ticket-spin-lock-asm-constraints +++ a/include/asm-x86/spinlock.h @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static __always_inline int __ticket_spin "1:" "sete %b1\n\t" "movzbl %b1,%0\n\t" - : "=&a" (tmp), "=Q" (new), "+m" (lock->slock) + : "=&a" (tmp), "=&Q" (new), "+m" (lock->slock) : : "memory", "cc"); @@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ static __always_inline void __ticket_spi /* don't need lfence here, because loads are in-order */ "jmp 1b\n" "2:" - : "+Q" (inc), "+m" (lock->slock), "=r" (tmp) + : "+r" (inc), "+m" (lock->slock), "=&r" (tmp) : : "memory", "cc"); } @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ static __always_inline int __ticket_spin "1:" "sete %b1\n\t" "movzbl %b1,%0\n\t" - : "=&a" (tmp), "=r" (new), "+m" (lock->slock) + : "=&a" (tmp), "=&q" (new), "+m" (lock->slock) : : "memory", "cc"); _