On Monday 23 July 2007 20:14:52 Satyam Sharma wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote: > > > > > > * The "I" constraint modifier is applicable only to immediate-value > > > operands, > > > and combining it with "r" is bogus. > > > > This is wrong too. > > > > The whole point of a "Ir" modifier is to say that the instruction takes > > *either* an "I" or an "r". > > Yup, sorry about this one, Andi pointed this out earlier. But the "I" > must still go I think, for the third reason in that changelog -- it > unnecessarily limits the bit offset to 0..31, but (at least from the > comment up front in that file) we do allow arbitrarily large @nr (upto > 255, of course, these instructions won't take anything greater than that).
As HPA pointed out that would risk not being correctly assembled by at least some binutils versions > > Andrew - the ones I've looked at were all wrong. Please don't take this > > series. > > I think I'll rescind the series anyway, a lot of patches turned out to > be wrong -- some due to mis-reading / incorrect gcc docs, others due to > other reasons ... this was just something I did thinking of as a cleanup > anyway, so I don't intend to push or correct this or anything. cpumask_t/nodemask_t bitmap optimizations would be useful. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
