On Sat, Jun 25 2005, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> On Friday 24 June 2005 23:09, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > This patch should _not_ go into Linus' tree.
> >
> > At some time in the future, we want to unconditionally enable REGPARM on
> > i386.
> >
> > Let's give it a bit broader testing coverage among -mm users.
> >
> > This patch:
> > - removes the dependency of REGPARM on EXPERIMENTAL
> > - let REGPARM default to y
> >
> > This patch assumes that people who use -mm are willing to test some more
> > experimental features.
> >
> > After this patch, REGPARM is still a config option users can disable.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
>
> Jens Axboe had hit an obscure bug with regparm just yesterday.
> It happened for him with gcc 3.3.5.
>
> I have a preprocessed .c file which allows to reporduce this.
> For me, gcc 3.3.6 is okay. need to build 3.3.5 and test.
>
> Meanwhile, maybe we shall prohibit regparm if gcc <=3.3.6 or 3.4?
It triggered without regparm as well, so I don't think that is to blame
here.
--
Jens Axboe
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
