Hi all,
Please review this text:
[
NOTES
Unless you need the finer grained control that this system
call provides, you probably want to use the GCC built-in
function __builtin___clear_cache(), which provides a more
portable interface:
void __builtin___clear_cache(void *begin, void *end);
On platforms that don't require instruction cache flushes,
__builtin___clear_cache() has no effect.
Note: On some GCC-compatible compilers, such as clang, the
prototype for this function uses char * instead of void *.
]
Thanks,
Alex
On 12/11/20 7:02 PM, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 12/11/20 9:15 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> i Alex,
>>
>> On 12/10/20 9:56 PM, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> v2:
>>>
>>> [
>>> NOTES
>>> Unless you need the finer grained control that this system
>>> call provides, you probably want to use the GCC built-in
>>> function __builtin___clear_cache(), which provides a more
>>> portable interface:
>>>
>>> void __builtin___clear_cache(void *begin, void *end);
>>> ]
>>
>> This seems a reasonable text to me, but I think it would be helpful
>> to say a little more precisely what kind of portability we are
>> talking about here.
> Sure.
>
>>
>> Greater ortability across Linux architectures? Greater portability
>> across platforms supported by GCC (including non-Linux) platforms?
>> Something else?
>
> '... which provides a portable interface across platforms supported by
> GCC:' sounds good.
>
> Maybe GCC devs have something more to add.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alex
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>
--
Alejandro Colomar
Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
http://www.alejandro-colomar.es
