[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0809062311540.3243@apollo.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2008 23:15:25 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arjan van de Veen <arjan@...radead.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Dan Hecht <dhecht@...are.com>,
Garrett Smith <garrett@...are.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC patch 0/4] TSC calibration improvements
On Sat, 6 Sep 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > Just checked. The -tip version still has the expect-- in the for()
> > > which might lead to stupid results depending on the gcc madness level.
> >
> > Umm. What? You're on some odd drugs.
>
> Oh, you mean te "--expect" in the last pit_expect_msb(). Yeah, that one
> looks bogus, but I don't understand what it has to do with gcc at all.
One gcc does:
i++;
if (i >= QUICK_PIT_ITERATIONS)
goto out;
expect--;
The other one does:
i++;
expect--;
if (i >= QUICK_PIT_ITERATIONS)
goto out;
Don't ask me which one is correct. It's just reality :(
/me goes back to consume legal german drugs
tglx
--
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