David Daney wrote: > Thiemo Seufer wrote: > > >Ralf Baechle wrote: > > > > > >>On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 03:20:27PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>2. It changes inline-assembly function prologues to be embedded within > >>>the > >>>functions, which makes them a bit safer as they can now explicitly refer > >>>to the "regs" struct and assures the code won't be removed or reordered. > >>> > >>> > >>It is possible that gcc changes one of the registers before save_static > >>and I can't imagine there's a reliable way to fix this in the inline > >>version. > > > >As long as __asm__ __volatile__ works as documented, this can't happen. > > > My understanding is that with gcc-3.4 that __asm__ __volatile__ does not > protect against dead code removal. If the code is not dead __volatile__ > works as documented, but dead code removal still happens. The inline version isn't dead code, and gcc isn't allowed to reschedule code around a __asm__ __volatile__, so the patch should be ok. Thiemo
