Richard Earnshaw <richard.earns...@arm.com> writes: > On 17/03/2020 12:34, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: >> Hi Andrea, >> I think the first part is fine when approved, but the 2nd part is >> problematic like Szabolcs >> already pointed out. We can't just change the ABI or semantics, and these >> builtins are critical >> for GLIBC performance. We would first need to change GLIBC back to using >> inline assembler >> so it will still write zeroes in the top 32 bits (since that is the current >> ABI). >> Cheers, >> Wilco >> > > No, you shouldn't ever arbitrarily write zeros to the upper bits (or > even worse, write garbage as we do now). That's the whole point of > these patches. > > R.
Hi Richard, FWIW I agree with you but, what should we do now? Shall I push the first patch at least? Thanks Andrea
