Re: Possible regression in arm/io.h

[Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>]

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 02:35:11PM +0100, Bastian Hecht wrote:
> 2012/10/24 Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>:
> > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 01:34:18PM +0100, Bastian Hecht wrote:
> >> 2012/10/24 Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>:
> >> > It sounds like we need to:
> >> >
> >> >         (a) Understand what has changed in GCC to cause this error to start
> >> >             cropping up.
> >> >
> >> >         (b) Have a look at the impact of using only "Q" on the generated
> >> >             code (especially register usage for the address).
> >> >
> >>
> >> Uff... I've just started to write ARM assembly and have no practical
> >> experience with the inner workings of real world compilers. So this
> >> time I'm afraid I was just good enough to report this. It sounds
> >> interesting to hunt it, but would take ages for me at this point.
> >
> > Ok, I'll have a look at the impact of moving exclusively to "Q" when I get a
> > chance. Which toolchain are you using?
> 
> gcc version 4.6.3 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.3-1ubuntu5)
> For a more verbose info take a look at the bug report link.

Ok, thanks. One other thing you could try while I try to find a copy of that
toolchain is changing the "+" modifier to an "=", like I proposed in this
version of the patch:

  http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2012-August/114971.html

Cheers,

Will