Yep, that's the one. Ignore my second patch :)
On Fri, 22 Feb 2002, Dave Kleikamp wrote: > This sounds a lot like gcc bug 2728: > http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view&pr=2728&database=gcc > > What version of gcc are you compiling with? > > Mike Ricketts wrote: > > > > > gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/jfs/src/oakley/linux-2.5.5/include -nostdinc -Wall > > -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer > > -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -pipe -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 > > -march=i686 -DMODULE -D_JFS_4K -DKBUILD_BASENAME=jfs_imap -c -o > > jfs_imap.o jfs_imap.c > > jfs_imap.c: In function `diAlloc': > > /jfs/src/oakley/linux-2.5.5/include/asm/rwsem.h:152: inconsistent operand > > constraints in an `asm' > > > > The relevant bit of rwsem.h is: > > > > ... > > /* > > * unlock after reading > > */ > > static inline void __up_read(struct rw_semaphore *sem) > > { > > __s32 tmp = -RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS; > > __asm__ __volatile__( > > "# beginning __up_read\n\t" > > LOCK_PREFIX " xadd %%edx,(%%eax)\n\t" /* subtracts 1, returns > > the old\ value */ > > Thanks, > Dave > > -- Mike Ricketts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.earth.li/~mike/ I never did it that way before. _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/jfs-discussion
