lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] signal: fix building with clang
On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 5:46 PM Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 03/07, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > We could use % everywhere,
>
> Yes.
>
> But again, why not simply use the "for (;;)" loops? Why we can't kill the
> supid switch(_NSIG_WORDS) tricks altogether?

I'd have to try, but I think you are right. It was probably an
overoptimization back in 1997 when the code got added to
linux-2.1.68pre1, and compilers have become smarter in the
meantime ;-)

Also, the common case these days is _NSIG_WORDS==1, which
is true on all 64-bit architectures other than MIPS64.

Arnd

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-03-07 22:46    [W:0.080 / U:0.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site