On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 09:19 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > So, in short, I'm afraid "m<>" needs to be used only for GCC 4.6+ > (and, vendors which backported the inline-asm handling changes > to their older gcc would need to adjust for their gccs too). > When "m<>" isn't used, it just leads to potential code pessimization > in inline-asms that are prepared for handling side-effects.
Ok, so we'll need some kind of macro to "fixup" those constraints ... Just to make sure I understand things properly, if we don't change them, the code will still be correct with 4.6 but sub-optimal, right ? Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
