Package: libatomic-ops
Version: 7.2~alpha5+cvs20100601-1
Tags: patch
User: [email protected]
Usertags: origin-ubuntu maverick ubuntu-patch

This the first issue cause a build failure by including the header on armel, the second one was an issue seen after a code review. See
https://launchpad.net/bugs/635388

diff -u libatomic-ops-7.2~alpha5+cvs20100601/debian/changelog 
libatomic-ops-7.2~alpha5+cvs20100601/debian/changelog
--- libatomic-ops-7.2~alpha5+cvs20100601/debian/changelog
+++ libatomic-ops-7.2~alpha5+cvs20100601/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+libatomic-ops (7.2~alpha5+cvs20100601-1ubuntu1) maverick; urgency=low
+
+  * atomic_ops.h: Define AO_GENERALIZE_TWICE for armel. LP: #635388.
+  * Fix inline asm for for data memory barrier on arm (Dave Martin).
+
+ -- Matthias Klose <[email protected]>  Fri, 17 Sep 2010 15:18:51 +0200
+
 libatomic-ops (7.2~alpha5+cvs20100601-1) unstable; urgency=low
 
   * Update from upstream CVS, to fix AVR build issues with change from
only in patch2:
unchanged:
--- libatomic-ops-7.2~alpha5+cvs20100601.orig/src/atomic_ops.h
+++ libatomic-ops-7.2~alpha5+cvs20100601/src/atomic_ops.h
@@ -241,6 +241,7 @@
 # if defined(__arm__) && !defined(AO_USE_PTHREAD_DEFS)
 #   include "atomic_ops/sysdeps/gcc/arm.h"
 #   define AO_CAN_EMUL_CAS
+#   define AO_GENERALIZE_TWICE
 # endif /* __arm__ */
 # if defined(__cris__) || defined(CRIS)
 #   include "atomic_ops/sysdeps/gcc/cris.h"
only in patch2:
unchanged:
--- libatomic-ops-7.2~alpha5+cvs20100601.orig/src/atomic_ops/sysdeps/gcc/arm.h
+++ libatomic-ops-7.2~alpha5+cvs20100601/src/atomic_ops/sysdeps/gcc/arm.h
@@ -46,8 +46,8 @@
 #ifndef AO_UNIPROCESSOR
         /* issue an data memory barrier (keeps ordering of memory transactions 
 */
         /* before and after this operation)                                    
 */
-        unsigned int dest=0;
-        __asm__ __volatile__("mcr p15,0,%0,c7,c10,5" :"=&r"(dest) : : 
"memory");
+        unsigned int arg=0;
+        __asm__ __volatile__("mcr p15,0,%0,c7,c10,5" : : "r" (arg) : "memory");
 #endif
 }
 

Reply via email to