* Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > So for >= 4.8.3 just assume no workaround is needed, otherwise scan
> > assembly.
>
> Right, tedious and error prone it is.. :-)
>
> Would it make sense to create something whereby GCC can tell us about
> these things? Maybe something like:
>
> __builtin_bug_fi
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 02:32:36PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 01:56:17PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > We didn't do version checks for CC_HAVE_ASM_GOTO because of vendor
> > backports; can't we detect this in the same way?
>
> The problem is that it will be harder to
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 01:56:17PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:55:06AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * GCC 'asm goto' miscompiles certain code sequences:
> > + *
> > + * http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58670
> > + *
> > + * Work it around via qu
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:55:06AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> +/*
> + * GCC 'asm goto' miscompiles certain code sequences:
> + *
> + * http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58670
> + *
> + * Work it around via quirk suggested by Jakub Jelinek.
> + * Fixed in GCC 4.8.2 and later versions.
>
4 matches
Mail list logo
