From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Jul  2 18:25:42 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from wall.polstra.com (rtrwan160.accessone.com [206.213.115.74])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D941737B5F8
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Sun,  2 Jul 2000 18:25:40 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from jdp@polstra.com)
Received: from vashon.polstra.com (vashon.polstra.com [206.213.73.13])
	by wall.polstra.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA16367;
	Sun, 2 Jul 2000 18:25:39 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from jdp@polstra.com)
From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>
Received: (from jdp@localhost)
	by vashon.polstra.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id SAA32541;
	Sun, 2 Jul 2000 18:25:39 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from jdp@polstra.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2000 18:25:39 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <200007030125.SAA32541@vashon.polstra.com>
To: peter@netplex.com.au
Subject: Re: GCC extended asm experts please look at this 
In-Reply-To: <20000703003530.9B6AB1CD7@overcee.netplex.com.au>
References: <20000703003530.9B6AB1CD7@overcee.netplex.com.au>
Organization: Polstra & Co., Seattle, WA
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

In article <20000703003530.9B6AB1CD7@overcee.netplex.com.au>,
Peter Wemm  <peter@netplex.com.au> wrote:

> If I change it to use a static inline function, it seems to work and
> will generate identical code (with -O):

Thanks!  I'll give that a try in both places where I'm having this
problem.

> It appears to generate valid code without -O, but I am not 100%
> sure.  It is very inefficient without -O.

OK, I'll look at the code closely and try to convince myself that it's
correct.  I don't care if it's inefficient without optimization.  I'm
just trying to avoid having to field problem reports from people who
for some reason build world without optimization.  (This is for the
dynamic linker.)

Thanks again for the help!

John


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message