lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jul]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [patch 134/149] x86, paravirt: Add a global synchronization point for pvclock
    From
    On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:
    >
    > The documentation makes no reference to that property; in fact it
    > suggests it is outright not true:

    The gcc documentation wrt inline asm's is totally worthless. Don't
    even bother quoting it - because the gcc people themselves have never
    cared. If the docs ever end up not matching what they want to do, they
    will just change the documentation.

    In other words, at least historically the docs are not in any way
    meaningful. They are not a "these are the semantics we guarantee",
    they are just random noise. As I mentioned, the docs historically just
    said something like "will not be moved significantly", and apparently
    they've been changed to be something else.

    The only thing that has ever been meaningful is "this works". And, of
    course, that has changed over time too, including actual
    recommendations on how to make something work (as mentioned, iirc "+"
    was only valid on register constraints, and "+m" used to not be
    allowed _or_ recommended, these days it's the only way to do certain
    things).

    It's irritating, because in other circumstances, gcc people take the
    reverse approach, and consider paper documentation more important than
    actual implementation issues. So sometimes they say "hey, this is the
    spec", but when it comes to their own docs, the answer has
    historically been "we'll just change the spec".

    Linus


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-07-14 02:17    [W:4.141 / U:0.056 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site