Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 08 Jul 2006 23:13:51 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile' | From | David Miller <> |
| |
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 20:58:37 -0700 (PDT)
> We can certainly write > > ... > :"=m" (*ptr) > :"m" (*ptr) > ... > > instead of the much simpler > > :"+m" (*ptr) > > but we've been using that "+m" format for a long time already (and I > _think_ we did so at the suggestion of gcc people), and it would be much > better if the gcc documentation was just fixed here.
I honestly don't know why that language is there about '+' saying to only use it when the constraints allow a register. Perhaps there are some implications for reload. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |