From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 14:58:54 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Bastian Hecht Subject: Re: Possible regression in arm/io.h Message-ID: <20121024135854.GD7339@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20121024105223.GC23775@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> <20121024130957.GB7339@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Artem Bityutskiy List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 02:35:11PM +0100, Bastian Hecht wrote: > 2012/10/24 Will Deacon : > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 01:34:18PM +0100, Bastian Hecht wrote: > >> 2012/10/24 Will Deacon : > >> > 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