Re: [PATCH] __up_read and gcc-3.0

2001-05-11 Thread Petr Vandrovec
On 11 May 01 at 9:13, Tom Leete wrote: > > __asm__ __volatile__( > > "# beginning __up_read\n\t" > > + " movl %2,%%edx\n\t" > > LOCK_PREFIX" xadd %%edx,(%%eax)\n\t" /* subtracts 1, returns the old >value */ > > " js

Re: [PATCH] __up_read and gcc-3.0

2001-05-11 Thread Tom Leete
Petr Vandrovec wrote: > > Hi Alan, > can you apply this patch to next 2.4.4-acX ? This fixes problem with > gcc3.0 (20010426) unable to compile this under some conditions. As > __up_write() uses same code ("i" instead of tmp variable), I think > that you should apply this. It can cause

Re: [PATCH] __up_read and gcc-3.0

2001-05-11 Thread Tom Leete
Petr Vandrovec wrote: Hi Alan, can you apply this patch to next 2.4.4-acX ? This fixes problem with gcc3.0 (20010426) unable to compile this under some conditions. As __up_write() uses same code (i instead of tmp variable), I think that you should apply this. It can cause slower

Re: [PATCH] __up_read and gcc-3.0

2001-05-11 Thread Petr Vandrovec
On 11 May 01 at 9:13, Tom Leete wrote: __asm__ __volatile__( # beginning __up_read\n\t + movl %2,%%edx\n\t LOCK_PREFIX xadd %%edx,(%%eax)\n\t /* subtracts 1, returns the old value */ js2f\n\t /* jump if

[PATCH] __up_read and gcc-3.0

2001-05-09 Thread Petr Vandrovec
Hi Alan, can you apply this patch to next 2.4.4-acX ? This fixes problem with gcc3.0 (20010426) unable to compile this under some conditions. As __up_write() uses same code ("i" instead of tmp variable), I think that you should apply this. It can cause slower code, as gcc cannot move "movl

[PATCH] __up_read and gcc-3.0

2001-05-09 Thread Petr Vandrovec
Hi Alan, can you apply this patch to next 2.4.4-acX ? This fixes problem with gcc3.0 (20010426) unable to compile this under some conditions. As __up_write() uses same code (i instead of tmp variable), I think that you should apply this. It can cause slower code, as gcc cannot move movl