On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 11:38:35AM -0800, John Baldwin wrote:
On 21-Nov-01 David Xu wrote:
4.4-stable, file sys/i386/include/cpufunc.h,
--- cpufunc.h.orig Wed Nov 21 13:35:36 2001
+++ cpufunc.h Wed Nov 21 15:00:12 2001
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@
{
u_int result;
-
On 29-Nov-01 Peter Pentchev wrote:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 11:38:35AM -0800, John Baldwin wrote:
On 21-Nov-01 David Xu wrote:
4.4-stable, file sys/i386/include/cpufunc.h,
--- cpufunc.h.orig Wed Nov 21 13:35:36 2001
+++ cpufunc.h Wed Nov 21 15:00:12 2001
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@
On 22-Nov-01 David Xu wrote:
According to GCC manual of inline assembler instruction, it says if your
instruction
changes condition code register(on X86, it's cpu flag register, and a simple
addl
instruction can affect it), you'd put cc there, I have reviewed some source
header
files
-
From: John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: David Xu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 3:38 AM
Subject: RE: add some constraints in cpufunc.h
On 21-Nov-01 David Xu wrote:
4.4-stable, file sys/i386/include/cpufunc.h,
--- cpufunc.h.orig Wed Nov 21
4.4-stable, file sys/i386/include/cpufunc.h,
--- cpufunc.h.orig Wed Nov 21 13:35:36 2001
+++ cpufunc.h Wed Nov 21 15:00:12 2001
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@
{
u_int result;
- __asm __volatile(bsfl %0,%0 : =r (result) : 0 (mask));
+ __asm __volatile(bsfl %0,%0 : =r (result)
5 matches
Mail list logo