Re: [PATCH 2/8] i386: bitops: Rectify bogus "Ir" constraints

[Andi Kleen]

> Whoa, thanks for explaining that to me -- I didn't know, obviously. I had
> just written a test program that used "Ir" with an automatic variable
> defined in the inline function (as is the case with these bitops) and
> observed that even when I gave > 32 values, it would still work -- hence
> my conclusion.
> 
> However, the patch still stands, does it not? [ I will modify the
> changelog, obviously. ] The thing is that we don't want to limit
> @nr to <= 31 in the first place, or am I wrong again? :-)

These bit operations only allow 8 bit immediates, so 0..255 would
be correct. N might work from the 4.1 docs, but I don't know if it works 
in all old supported gccs (3.2+)

However I is definitely not wrong and most bit numbers are small anyways.

-Andi
-
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/