https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32771
Julien Nabet <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #30 from Julien Nabet <[email protected]> --- Michael: by taking a quick look to the bt, we can see this: sal3!osl_incrementInterlockedCount+0x1b: 56b68684 f00fc101 lock xadd dword ptr [ecx],eax ds:002b:00000000=???????? 0:000:x86> g and opengrok shows this (http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/sal/osl/w32/interlck.c#63) 63 #else 64 #pragma warning(disable: 4035) 65 { 66 __asm 67 { 68 mov ecx, pCount 69 mov eax, 1 70 mov edx, osl_isSingleCPU 71 cmp edx, 0 72 je is_not_single 73 xadd dword ptr [ecx],eax 74 jmp cont 75 is_not_single: 76 lock xadd dword ptr [ecx],eax 77 cont: 78 inc eax 79 } 80 } but above all this comment some lines above in this same file: /* For all Intel x86 above x486 we use a spezial inline assembler implementation. The main reason is that WIN9? does not return the result of the operation. Instead there is only returned a value greater than zero is the increment result is greater than zero, but not the result of the addition. For Windows NT the native function could be used, because the correct result is returned. Beacuse of simpler code maintance and performace reasons we use on every x86-Windows-Platform the inline assembler implementation. */ since min Windows version for LO >= 4.0 is WinXP, could this part be removed or simplified? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________ Libreoffice-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
