From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757453AbXHGIQS (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2007 04:16:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754523AbXHGIQH (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2007 04:16:07 -0400 Received: from 1wt.eu ([62.212.114.60]:1228 "EHLO 1wt.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752853AbXHGIQG (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2007 04:16:06 -0400 Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 10:12:29 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Axel Reinhold Cc: Segher Boessenkool , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Kernel Bug in 2.4.35 when compiled gcc>=4.2.0 and -march=c3 Message-ID: <20070807081229.GA17889@1wt.eu> References: <20070806211631.GA14501@1wt.eu> <200708070504.l7754KIr004277@bongo.freakout.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200708070504.l7754KIr004277@bongo.freakout.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 07:04:20AM +0200, Axel Reinhold wrote: > According to Willy Tarreau: > > > >Well, top-level assembly is usually nasty. Setting the section in the > > > >assembly statement as you said is probably the only thing you *can* do. > > > > > I do not understand the details of the discussion, but isn't the > fact, that there is more than one way for the compiler to produce > "correct" code of the nasty statements, also a "timebomb" for > other projects - especially for Linux 2.6? no because 2.6 uses quite a different method. Willy