On 06.09.2008 22:34, Stefan Reinauer wrote: > Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > >> v3 uses all combinations of __asm__, asm, __volatile__, volatile and >> single variations to declare inline asm statements. "asm" is a GNU C >> extension, while volatile is ANSI C. That means: >> - __volatile__ can be replaced by volatile unless you use a pure K&R >> compiler. >> - asm is not a reserved keyword and should be replaced by __asm__. >> As a bonus, grepping for __asm__ returns less hits than asm because asm >> is also used as a normal word in comments. >> >> > What are the implications of this? I think we should either go __asm__ > __volatile__ or asm volatile for the sake of looking at the code without > eye cancer, but not mix it. > > We're absolutely gcc specific, so discussing about asm not being > reserved sounds a bit vain. Also, is __asm__ reserved? Reserved by whom? > I know more compilers that know about asm than __asm__ if we're really > trying to become non-GNU-centric. > > What's the goal of your patch? >
Two goals: 1. __volatile__ is pointless since 1983 (ANSI-C). No idea why anyone uses it. 2. Neither __asm__ nor asm are reserved. Grepping for asm turns up lots of stuff that is not inline asm, so using __asm__ eases grepping. If you prefer asm volatile, tell me. I'll prepare an updated patch. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- http://www.hailfinger.org/ -- coreboot mailing list [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
