linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf: Fix compilation on gcc 4.0.2

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20101118134038.GE12667@basil.fritz.box>
Date:	Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:40:38 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, acme@...hat.com,
	mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf: Fix compilation on gcc 4.0.2

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 02:38:09PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le jeudi 18 novembre 2010 à 14:31 +0100, Andi Kleen a écrit :
> > > Should we be using more of the kernel makefile magic to detect this?
> > 
> > In theory yes, but the two warnings didn't seem to be too useful
> > to me so it's probably not worth it just for those two.
> > 
> > -Andi
> > 
> 
> Is the second case because of the __always_inline in
> util/include/linux/bitops.h ?

I think so.

> 
> Not sure why its needed for test_bit() ?

Because it generates terrible code when not inlined
and apparently some gcc versions of times past didn't
in some cases.

-Andi
--
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/