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>