Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()

[Al Viro]

On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 10:22:15AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> So we might as well keep the loop, since both are two-byte instructions 
> >> that tell gcc that it will never continue.
> > 
> > Umm...  Actually, we might be able to do something like
> > {
> > 	l: __builtin_trap();
> > 	static struct ... v __attribute__((section(...))) = { &&l, n, file };
> > }
> > 
> > except that it would need block-local labels and those are ugly (so's
> > &&<label>, while we are at it)...
> 
> I thought gcc was buggy when it came to passing &&labels to assembly.

Where do you see passing &&<label> to assembly?  More interesting question
is whether gcc believes it to be const...
-
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/