[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130220214943.9b28a5b208da9f081387c55e@freescale.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 21:49:43 -0600
From: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@...escale.com>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>
CC: "Woodhouse, David" <david.woodhouse@...el.com>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@...ox.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] arm: use built-in byte swap function
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:43:18 -0500
Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2013, Woodhouse, David wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 09:06 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > ... in which case there is no harm shipping a .c file and trivially
> > > enforcing -O2, the rest being equal.
> >
> > For today's compilers, unless the wind changes.
>
> We'll adapt if necessary. Going with -O2 should remain pretty safe anyway.
Alas, not so for gcc 4.4 - I had forgotten I had tested
Ubuntu/Linaro 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2101491/
add -O2 to that test script and gcc 4.4 *always* emits calls to
__bswap[sd]i2, even with -march=armv6k+.
I'll try working on an assembly version given it probably
makes more sense, future-gcc-immunity-wise.
Otherwise we're back to the old 'if GCC_VERSION >= 40500' in
arch/arm/include/asm/swab.h...
Kim
--
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