> > The C codepaths are essentially untested on this driver.
>
> Has any part of this driver ever be tested with kernel 2.6?
> Or compiled with gcc 4?
The C code paths have never been tested at all, the asm ones certainly
worked in late 2.4, but I don't; have an ISA box any more.
-
To unsubscribe
On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 03:18:41PM +, Alan wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 20:13:00 +0100
> Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Using assembler code for performance in drivers might have been a good
> > idea 15 years ago when this code was written, but with today's compilers
> > that's
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 20:13:00 +0100
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Using assembler code for performance in drivers might have been a good
> idea 15 years ago when this code was written, but with today's compilers
> that's unlikely to be an advantage.
>
> Besides this, it also hurts the
Using assembler code for performance in drivers might have been a good
idea 15 years ago when this code was written, but with today's compilers
that's unlikely to be an advantage.
Besides this, it also hurts the readability.
Simply use the C code that was already there as an alternative.
Signe
Using assembler code for performance in drivers might have been a good
idea 15 years ago when this code was written, but with today's compilers
that's unlikely to be an advantage.
Besides this, it also hurts the readability.
Simply use the C code that was already there as an alternative.
Signe
5 matches
Mail list logo