From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752809AbZHITQL (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Aug 2009 15:16:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752735AbZHITQK (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Aug 2009 15:16:10 -0400 Received: from slow3-v.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.178.89]:58047 "EHLO slow3-v.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752732AbZHITQK (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Aug 2009 15:16:10 -0400 Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 11:34:43 -0700 From: Josh Triplett To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Simplify calls to cpuid by using + for in/out constraints Message-ID: <20090809183443.GA24130@feather> References: <20090808202113.GA21962@feather> <4A7F0511.6060408@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A7F0511.6060408@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 10:19:13AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > I would prefer to not apply this patch unless there is a good reason. > The existing code isn't broken, and any time we change an asm() > statement we risk triggering bugs in some obscure gcc version. Fair enough. > It isn't, of course, that the proposed change is wrong, but simply that > it is an unnecessary change, and since it involves asm() statements I > would like to reject it for churn reduction reasons. Especially so > since it is "build-tested only". Given the risk of "bugs in some obscure gcc version", it doesn't seem like running it or even comparing for identical code would validate anything more than the correctness of the gcc version currently in use. - Josh triplett