From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755110AbZBSQc6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2009 11:32:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752470AbZBSQct (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2009 11:32:49 -0500 Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:47435 "EHLO mail.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752440AbZBSQct (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2009 11:32:49 -0500 Message-ID: <499D89AF.5010406@goop.org> Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 08:32:47 -0800 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Petr Tesarik , "H. Peter Anvin" , LKML Subject: Re: Definition of BUG on x86 References: <499C4786.5010504@goop.org> <1235043648.15053.35.camel@nathan.suse.cz> <20090219121027.GB1703@elte.hu> <1235045971.15053.42.camel@nathan.suse.cz> <20090219122211.GE1703@elte.hu> <1235047082.15053.49.camel@nathan.suse.cz> <20090219124702.GC22044@elte.hu> <1235048535.15053.52.camel@nathan.suse.cz> <20090219144902.GA8650@elte.hu> <499D7B9D.7060001@goop.org> <20090219153544.GA31637@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20090219153544.GA31637@elte.hu> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ingo Molnar wrote: > could we just do: > > __builtin_trap(); > for (;;); > > and _now_ GCC would optimize away the infinite loop? And if it > does something silly in a future release, we'd either get a > build error or we'd run into the infinite loop for sure. > I guess that would work. And we have plenty of infrastructure and precedent for compiler-dependent defines like this. J