No worries :)
Just wanted to make sure you knew who you were talking to.

On Mon 12 Mar 2018 at 13:55, David Grayson <davidegray...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sorry to both of you.  My brain just messed up there and I only
> realized when it was too late.
>
> --David
>
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Martell Malone <martellmal...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Just so you are aware that is Martin not Martell.
> > Not sure if that was just an autocorrect or a typo but Martin is the one
> > doing this work here.
> >
> > On Mon 12 Mar 2018 at 12:20, Martin Storsjö <mar...@martin.st> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 12 Mar 2018, Martin Storsjö wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Sun, 11 Mar 2018, David Grayson wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Martell, did you send a bug report to clang too?  That seems like a
> >> >> serious bug for them to have.
> >> >
> >> > I didn't send one yet, but I will. It's curious as it seems to work
> fine
> >> for
> >> > x86_64 though.
> >> >
> >> >> Also, "asm volatile" statements cannot be removed, reordered or
> >> >> cached, right?  It seems like a bad idea to hamper GCC's
> optimizations
> >> >> and performance as a workaround for a clang bug.
> >> >
> >> > Well, if it'd be inline functions in a header, I'd be inclined to
> agree.
> >> All
> >> > of these are in non-inline functions (e.g. like the sqrt function,
> where
> >> you
> >> > expect it to always produce one "fsqrt" instruction), so I don't
> expect
> >> any
> >> > losses there.
> >> >
> >> > However, I do see a few instances of similar inline asm snippets in
> >> math.h,
> >> > and there, volatile indeed would be suboptimal.
> >>
> >> Actually, it seems like volatile already is specified in all the
> >> corresponding cases in math.h.
> >>
> >> // Martin
> >>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Mingw-w64-public mailing list
> >> Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
> >>
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mingw-w64-public mailing list
> > Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Mingw-w64-public mailing list
> Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public

Reply via email to