Re: [GCC] gcc vs. indentation

From: Samium Gromoff (deepfire@ibe.miee.ru)
Date: Mon Jun 30 2003 - 01:13:06 EST


On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 08:04:03 +0100 (BST)
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Samium Gromoff wrote:
> >
> > - if (Controller->FirmwareType == DAC960_V1_Controller)
> > - {
> > + if (Controller->FirmwareType == DAC960_V1_Controller) {
>
> > -origDAC960.o: file format elf32-i386
> > +./newDAC960.o: file format elf32-i386
> >
> > Disassembly of section .text:
> >
> > @@ -5837,7 +5837,7 @@
> > 52a8: 84 c0 test %al,%al
> > 52aa: 75 14 jne 52c0 <DAC960_V1_ProcessCompletedCommand+0x80>
> > 52ac: 0f 0b ud2a
> > - 52ae: 7d 0d jge 52bd <DAC960_V1_ProcessCompletedCommand+0x7d>
> > + 52ae: 7c 0d jl 52bd <DAC960_V1_ProcessCompletedCommand+0x7d>
> > 52b0: 27 daa
> > 52b1: 00 00 add %al,(%eax)
> > 52b3: 00 8d b6 00 00 00 add %cl,0xb6(%ebp)
> > @@ -5951,7 +5951,7 @@
> > 5421: 84 c0 test %al,%al
> > 5423: 0f 85 97 fe ff ff jne 52c0 <DAC960_V1_ProcessCompletedCommand+0x80>
> > 5429: 0f 0b ud2a
> > - 542b: 8f 0d 27 00 00 00 popl 0x27
> > + 542b: 8e 0d 27 00 00 00 movl 0x27,%cs
> > 5431: e9 8a fe ff ff jmp 52c0 <DAC960_V1_ProcessCompletedCommand+0x80>
> > 5436: 89 1c 24 mov %ebx,(%esp,1)
> > 5439: e8 fc ff ff ff call 543a <DAC960_V1_ProcessCompletedCommand+0x1fa>
> > @@ -7414,7 +7414,7 @@
> > 6ba2: 84 c0 test %al,%al
> > 6ba4: 75 0a jne 6bb0 <DAC960_V2_ProcessCompletedCommand+0xa0>
> > 6ba6: 0f 0b ud2a
> > - 6ba8: bc 11 27 00 00 mov $0x2711,%esp
> > + 6ba8: bb 11 27 00 00 mov $0x2711,%ebx
> > 6bad: 00 89 f6 83 bc 24 add %cl,0x24bc83f6(%ecx)
> > 6bb3: 84 00 test %al,(%eax)
> > 6bb5: 00 00 add %al,(%eax)
> >
> > Thats it.
> > The point is i thought and hoped that gcc abstract syntax tree constructor is
> > indentation invariant, and that is seemingly not true.
>
> It's okay, no need to worry. See the "ud2a"s just above the differences?
> Those are BUG()s, and they're going to be followed by a short __LINE__
> then __FILE__ pointer. Your indentation change removed one line, so the
> BUG()'s __LINE__ numbers have gone down one. (And it takes a while for
> the disassembly to get back to sanity with the instructions thereafter.)

        Uhhuh, i see now... those by-one differences looked strange for me... :-)

>
> Hugh
>
>

-- 
regards, Samium Gromoff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 30 2003 - 22:00:32 EST