Messages in this thread | | | From | Segher Boessenkool <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures | Date | Sat, 18 Aug 2007 01:55:55 +0200 |
| |
>>> #define forget(a) __asm__ __volatile__ ("" :"=m" (a) :"m" (a)) >>> >>> [ This is exactly equivalent to using "+m" in the constraints, as >>> recently >>> explained on a GCC list somewhere, in response to the patch in my >>> bitops >>> series a few weeks back where I thought "+m" was bogus. ] >> >> [It wasn't explained on a GCC list in response to your patch, as >> far as I can see -- if I missed it, please point me to an archived >> version of it]. > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-07/msg01758.html
Ah yes, that old thread, thank you.
> That's when _I_ came to know how GCC interprets "+m", but probably > this has been explained on those lists multiple times. Who cares, > anyway?
I just couldn't find the thread you meant, I thought I missed have it, that's all :-)
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/
| |