[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ef1cd66f0702121143i765ccd1ere8ecb28eeaab5759@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:43:36 +0000
From: "Jochen Voß" <jochen.voss@...glemail.com>
To: "Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>
Cc: "Randy Dunlap" <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@...radead.org>,
"Segher Boessenkool" <segher@...nel.crashing.org>,
patches@...-64.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH x86 for review III] [1/29] i386: avoid gcc extension
Hi,
On 12/02/07, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> wrote:
> setcc() in math-emu is written as a gcc extension statement expression
> macro that returns a value. However, it's not used that way and it's not
> needed like that, so just make it a do-while non-extension macro so that we
> don't use an extension when it's not needed.
This description ...
> -#define setcc(cc) ({ \
> - partial_status &= ~(SW_C0|SW_C1|SW_C2|SW_C3); \
> - partial_status |= (cc) & (SW_C0|SW_C1|SW_C2|SW_C3); })
> +static inline void setcc(int cc)
> +{
> + partial_status &= ~(SW_C0|SW_C1|SW_C2|SW_C3);
> + partial_status |= (cc) & (SW_C0|SW_C1|SW_C2|SW_C3);
> +}
... seems to contradict the implementation. No "do-while" here.
I hope this helps,
Jochen
--
http://seehuhn.de/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists