Re: [PATCH -v2 14/33] locking,m68k: Implement atomic_fetch_{add,sub,and,or,xor}()

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Peter,

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 7:44 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 05:04:24PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > If not, do you want me to 'fix' this or just remove the comment?
>>
>> It's not broken, so nothing to fix.
>
> Its non obvious code, that's usually plenty reason to change it.
>
> Geert, you maintain this stuff, what say you? Is there still a good
> reason (like supporting ancient compilers that don't do "+d" for
> example) to keep the code as is?

I don't know when support for "+d" was introduced.
But given people regularly use old compilers, I'm not inclined to change it,
unless there's a very good reason.

BTW, what's the failure mode if an old compiler not supporting "+d"
encounters it?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds