On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 08:21:11PM +0000, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Ralf Baechle <ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > I'd appreciate if somebody with gcc 4.0.1 could test this kernel patch > > below. > > Sorry in advance if this is a dup, but... No, not a dupe. > and this requires val (%1) to be a 64-bit value. In the case I saw, > gcc was using $3 for the 32-bit val, and wasn't expecting $4 to be > clobbered. Thanks, makes perfect sense. I tried various other obscure things and your patch was holding up, so I just applied it. Thanks, Ralf PS: If in the future you could include a Signed-off-by: line.
