On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 7:16 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I wrote: >> I came across some websites suggesting that icc will handle gcc-style >> asm blocks as long as you give it the -fasm-blocks command line option. >> It would be awfully nice to get rid of the __INTEL_COMPILER special >> cases in s_lock.h and the atomics headers --- would someone who has >> icc at hand check into this theory? > > Hmm ... wait a second. The main collection of asm blocks in s_lock.h > believes that Intel's compiler will take gcc-style asm without any help: > > #if defined(__GNUC__) || defined(__INTEL_COMPILER) > > It has believed that since 2003. There are just two stanzas in s_lock.h > that think icc needs its own implementation; one was introduced in 2005 > and the other in 2014, and I'm betting both of them are confused about it.
The 2005 block seems to have been the result of this thread: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/200503090429.j294tlg10...@candle.pha.pa.us That thread seems pretty clear about asm() not working in that poster's environment. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
