From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: david.woodhouse@intel.com (Woodhouse, David) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 09:02:04 +0000 Subject: [RFC] arm: use built-in byte swap function In-Reply-To: <20130205210436.670c62e26d2121330e87af35@freescale.com> References: <20130128193033.8a0b0a871150c99247f05a95@freescale.com> <20130129083522.GA14302@pd.tnic> <1359478014.3529.157.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20130129174249.GB25415@pd.tnic> <1359482147.3529.161.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20130129181046.GC25415@pd.tnic> <1359541333.3529.186.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20130130200900.9d7cf7908caeaef4ecee1d61@freescale.com> <20130131092801.GV23505@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20130131145947.f62474a0600848df86548b96@freescale.com> <20130201011712.GF23505@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <1359703995.23531.6.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20130205210436.670c62e26d2121330e87af35@freescale.com> Message-ID: <1360141322.6066.4.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 21:04 -0600, Kim Phillips wrote: > gcc -Os emits calls to __bswapsi2 on those platforms to save space > because they don't have the single rev byte swap instruction. Is that the right thing for GCC to do in that situation? If so, perhaps we should be *providing* __bswap[sd]i2 functions for it to use? If not, perhaps there should be a PR filed? Or is our use case justifiably different to the general case of '-Os'? If so, why? -- Sent with MeeGo's ActiveSync support. David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse at intel.com Intel Corporation -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 4370 bytes Desc: not available URL: