From: David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 11:11:28 +0100 > Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > - * impractical. So, now we fall back to using memcpy. > > + * impractical. So, now we fall back to using memmov. > > That's memmove, not memmov. Any why memmove, not memcpy? Is __tmp likely to > overlap with *ptr? No, I think it has something to do with what cases GCC is allowed to optimize the call inline and what cases it cannot wrt. alignment of datums. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
