gcc shouldn't think there is any reason to cache the address.Can I rely on that being true in the future?
As long as the compiler stays smart enough, and doesn't do stupid things :-) (i.e., no. Sigh). Segher - 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/
- References:
- [RFC/PATCH] Make powerpc64 use __thread for per-cpu variables
- From: Paul Mackerras <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH] Make powerpc64 use __thread for per-cpu variables
- From: Richard Henderson <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH] Make powerpc64 use __thread for per-cpu variables
- From: "David S. Miller" <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH] Make powerpc64 use __thread for per-cpu variables
- From: Paul Mackerras <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH] Make powerpc64 use __thread for per-cpu variables
- From: Alan Modra <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC/PATCH] Make powerpc64 use __thread for per-cpu variables
- From: Paul Mackerras <[email protected]>
- [RFC/PATCH] Make powerpc64 use __thread for per-cpu variables
- Prev by Date: Re: [RFC/PATCH] Make powerpc64 use __thread for per-cpu variables
- Next by Date: Linux v2.6.17-rc4
- Previous by thread: Re: [RFC/PATCH] Make powerpc64 use __thread for per-cpu variables
- Next by thread: Re: [RFC/PATCH] Make powerpc64 use __thread for per-cpu variables
- Index(es):
 |