Messages in this thread | | | From | Segher Boessenkool <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] make atomic_t volatile on all architectures | Date | Sun, 12 Aug 2007 18:30:32 +0200 |
| |
>> "+m" works. We use it. It's better than the alternatives. Pointing to >> stale documentation doesn't change anything. > > Well, perhaps on i386. I've seen some older versions of the s390 gcc > die > with an ICE because I have used "+m" in some kernel inline assembly. > I'm > happy to hear that this issue is fixed in recent gcc. Now I'll have to > find out if this is already true with gcc 3.x.
It was fixed (that is, "+m" is translated into a separate read and write by GCC itself) in GCC-4.0.0, I just learnt.
> The duplication "=m" and "m" with the same constraint is rather > annoying.
Yeah. Compiler errors are more annoying though I dare say ;-)
Segher
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |