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
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(vo
Hi Heinrich,
It looks like a bug (or at least an undocumented divergence from GCC) in
Clang/LLVM. Or I couldn't find the documentation for it.
Clang uses 'char *':
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/7faf62a80bfc3a9dfe34133681fcc31f8e8d658b/clang/include/clang/Basic/Builtins.def#L583
GCC
It looks like GCC recently moved from 'char *' to 'void *'.
This SO question[1] (4 years ago) quotes the GCC docs
and they had 'char *'.
Maybe Clang hasn't noticed the change.
I'll report a bug.
[1]: https://stackoverflow.com/q/35741814/6872717
On 12/9/20 8:15 PM, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wr
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 __bui
I forgot to add a junk to the text.
v4:
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 portable
interface across platforms supported
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 pr
