Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 11:23:43 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: <current@FreeBSD.org>, Jim Bryant <kc5vdj@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: kernel won't build - atomic.c/atomic.h errors... Message-ID: <20011111111640.M22418-100000@delplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.011110135709.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 10 Nov 2001, John Baldwin wrote:
> On 08-Nov-01 Bruce Evans wrote:
> > The i386 <machine/atomic.h> still uses archaic constraints for some
> > input-output operands ("0" for the first operand). These never worked
> > right and if fact don't actually work for compiling this file without
> > optimization.
>
> Hmm, would you prefer this diff then, I've had it floating around for a while
> now but wasn't sure it was right:
Yes, it is right provided all the operand renumbering is right. I suppose
it can't be checked simply by comparing all objects, because it sometimes
changes the register allocation?
There are a couple more "0"s in atomic_cmpset_int(), and many more in other
files (even in cpufunc.h).
Bruce
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011111111640.M22418-100000>