Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:38:29 -0700 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: gf128_add can be marked as __pure2 Message-ID: <CAF6rxgnt9eXuLxAa6ZVc7k-CjQYUjfLW4%2B%2BYe%2BQM2giMFwjv8A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20180317173815.GM75576@funkthat.com> References: <CAF6rxgn7eEu5WZBH93N4AMHcwCwU3cdhH3rhQunTY%2BCo4PvX4w@mail.gmail.com> <20180317173815.GM75576@funkthat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 17 March 2018 at 10:38, John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com> wrote: > Eitan Adler wrote this message on Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 19:15 -0800: >> Is there any reason not to apply this patch? > > I don't see why there wouldn't be.. > >> __pure2 means __attribute__((const)) which is correct in this case as >> gf128_add read no global memory: > > Are these documented some where? Looksl ike __pure2 was created instead > of using __pure for some reason... I wish these things were documented > properly so others could know the correct usage... I don't know where the FreeBSD macros are documented (they are implementedi cdefs.h). https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Common-Function-Attributes.html#Common-Function-Attributes documents the attributes __pure2 is const __pure is pure -- Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgnt9eXuLxAa6ZVc7k-CjQYUjfLW4%2B%2BYe%2BQM2giMFwjv8A>