> The idea is not to hide the unlikely, but to leave the opportunity to > make this primitive evolve in something that won't depend on a load > immediate and only require patching of a jump, given the appropriate gcc > support (yet to come).
If that ever happens the code can be still changed. But i don't think it's a good idea to uglify the code for something that if it ever exists will be a long time away. Besides if gcc supports it I assume the gcc support could also be written in a way that makes it possible to hide it inside a standard if () -Andi - 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/
