H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Could it be a gcc version difference?
>
Likely. Well, we can always try it and see how much crap turns up. If
gcc keeps quiet about it, its certainly an improvement over the dummy loop.
J
-
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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()
- References:
- [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()
- From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()
- From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()
- From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
- [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()
- Prev by Date: Re: miserable performance of 2.6.21 under network load
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 8/8] i386: bitops: smp_mb__{before, after}_clear_bit() definitions
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH][RFC] getting rid of stupid loop in BUG()
- Index(es):
 |