[lkml]   [2003]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: 2.5 'what to expect'
    Steven Cole wrote:
    > On Fri, 2003-07-11 at 09:11, Larry McVoy wrote:
    >>On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 04:00:33PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
    >>>On Gwe, 2003-07-11 at 15:46, Tomas Szepe wrote:
    >>>>>>- gcc 3.2.2-5 as shipped by Red Hat generates incorrect code in the
    >>>>>> kmalloc optimisation introduced in 2.5.71
    >>>>>> See
    >>>>>This URL appears wrong!
    >>>>Nahh, that's just the same old annoying bkbits bug. Try with lynx...
    >>>I did - it references a changeset unrelayed to kmalloc
    >>I know, sorry. The version numbers in BK are not stable, they can't be.
    >>You have to use the underlying internal version number. If someone who
    >>knows can show me the output of
    >> bk changes -r<correct rev>
    >>for that changeset I will figure out a way to have a URL that doesn't change
    >>and send it to Dave for that doc as well as post it there.
    > This looks like the right one as currently numbered.
    > Steven

    There is no problem with the current version of this patch. I rewrote
    the original patch to work around the bug in gcc. The bug is that:

    if (size < X) return kmem_cache_alloc(...);

    would not cause the remaining if statements to be marked as dead code, but:

    if (size < X) goto found;
    found: return kmem_cache_alloc(...);

    does optimize properly.

    Brian Gerst

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:46    [W:0.021 / U:20.472 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site