Re: GCC proposal for "@" asm constraint

From: John Wehle (john@feith.com)
Date: Mon Sep 18 2000 - 18:53:04 EST


> I read the asm produced by some of some of my testcases. The current spinlock
> implementation seems to do exactly the _right_ thing in practice and nothing
> more. "memory" was instead causing reloads of constant addresses into registers
> and stuff that shouldn't be necessary (I was infact wondering about the reason
> of those suprious loads also in my first email).

What version of gcc? Recently some work was done to improve the handling
of constant memory.

-- John
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Feith Systems | Voice: 1-215-646-8000 | Email: john@feith.com |
| John Wehle | Fax: 1-215-540-5495 | |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

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



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 23 2000 - 21:00:19 EST