Re: [patch 2/8] compiler-gcc.h: add more comments to RELOC_HIDE

[Christoph Lameter]

On Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Richard Henderson wrote:

> I didn't explore the space of possible solutions, merely gave Rusty a solution
> that I knew would work, and would never fail because the compiler would never
> look through the asm.
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if the compiler thought "(long)&foo - large_constant"
> could be put back together into a small-data relocation, simply because at the
> level at which that optimization is performed, we've thrown away type data
> like long and void*; we only have modes.

We are talking about

(long)&foo + long_variable

Are you saying that the compiler will be ignoring the high bits in
variable because of the size of foo?

> Why are you wanting to change this at all?  It works as it is.

It looks like its useless and more an indication of either a broken
compiler or wrong assumptions about the compiler. Removing RELOC_HIDE
should allow the compiler to freely optimize the per cpu address
calculations.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/