[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTimEw0U5TqMcmoeShXQ67kqp32hp5fwd2oRQhWo2@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 10:08:54 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jim Bos <jim876@...all.nl>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
James Cloos <cloos@...loos.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andreas Schwab <schwab@...hat.com>,
Michael Matz <matz@...e.de>,
Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@...il.com>,
Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@...il.com>, gcc@....gnu.org
Subject: Re: gcc 4.5.1 / as 2.20.51.0.11 miscompiling drivers/char/i8k.c ?
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Jim Bos <jim876@...all.nl> wrote:
>
> Hmm, that doesn't work.
>
> [ Not sure if you read to whole thread but initial workaround was to
> change the asm(..) to asm volatile(..) which did work. ]
Since I have a different gcc than yours (and I'm not going to compile
my own), have you posted your broken .s file anywhere? In fact, with
the noinline (and the removal of the "+m" thing - iow just the patch
you tried), what does just the "i8k_smm" function assembly look like
for you after you've done a "make drivers/char/i8k.s"?
If the asm just doesn't exist AT ALL, that's just odd. Because every
single call-site of i8k_smm() clearly looks at the return value. So
the volatile really shouldn't make any difference from that
standpoint. Odd.
Linus
--
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