From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Jike Song <albcamus@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix inline assembly constraints
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 07:51:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4909C9D9.7040105@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <df9815e70810292340g52d38e83t47dffd02125b4fe3@mail.gmail.com>
Jike Song wrote:
>
> Yes, sometimes gcc did have bugs with its obscure inline asm
> conventions. But I think the change of x86-64 atomic operations should
> be OK. Anyway, the "+" constraint is more clear than a "=m" output and
> a "m" input.
>
> The 32-bit atomic ops were already changed to "+m".(commit
> b862f3b099f3ea672c7438c0b282ce8201d39dfc)
>
You *THINK*. It's very easy to *THINK* that gcc won't do something
utterly moronic, and you'd be wrong.
Just changing it for the sake of churn is pointless... if there is a
bug, then we have to take the risk anyway, but if it is already correct,
then there is no point in provoking a bug. Not *your* bug, because your
code is correct, but gcc's bug.
FWIW, the reason that code doesn't use "+m" is because a version of gcc
which we no longer support didn't handle it. That by itself isn't a
reason to keep it, but there is also no reason to just "tidy" it, IMNSHO.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-30 14:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-29 16:32 [PATCH] x86: fix inline assembly constraints Jike Song
2008-10-29 16:32 ` Jike Song
2008-10-29 16:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-30 2:31 ` Jike Song
2008-10-30 3:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-10-30 6:40 ` Jike Song
2008-10-30 14:51 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2008-10-30 19:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-31 2:12 ` Jike Song
[not found] <fa.IZJ3RdF6xWbbMqWVWyYRstzZBsk@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.L4yER0Vo1brqQzpHIySgWqUN5UM@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.rs0w7okAn1If1ilwD81OTzT4rKg@ifi.uio.no>
2008-10-30 3:52 ` Robert Hancock
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4909C9D9.7040105@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=albcamus@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox