On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 11:37:28PM -0400, Rick Hohensee wrote: > In other words, if you know the push sequence of your C compiler's > function calls, you don't need asm("");. You are very much forgetting _inline_ asm. And if you think that's unimportant for performance, well, as Al would say, go back playing with Hurd. OG. - 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/
- Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't have asm("") Olivier Galibert
- Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't have asm("&quo... Cort Dougan
- Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't have asm("... H. Peter Anvin
- Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't have asm("... Linus Torvalds
- Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't have asm(&q... Cort Dougan
- Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't have as... Linus Torvalds
- Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't ha... Cort Dougan
- Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't have asm("&quo... pazke
- Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't have asm("&quo... Rick Hohensee
- Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't have asm("&quo... Michael Meissner
- Re: Why Plan 9 C compilers don't have asm("... Rick Hohensee