Marius Strobl wrote:
marius 2008-06-25 21:04:59 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
sys/sparc64/include in_cksum.h
Log:
SVN rev 180011 on 2008-06-25 21:04:59Z by marius
Use "__asm __volatile" rather than "__asm" for instruction sequences
that modify condition
Marius Strobl wrote:
marius 2008-06-27 22:17:14 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
sys/sparc64/include in_cksum.h
Log:
SVN rev 180073 on 2008-06-27 22:17:14Z by marius
Improve r180011 by explicitly adding the condition codes to the
clobber list.
You should
Marius Strobl wrote:
I wasn't aware that the clobber list allows to explicitly specify
the condition codes, thanks for the hint. Though it unfortunately
took me longer than two days to verify it's effect on the generated
code; sparc64 could still have been one of the archs where "cc" has
no effec
Bruce Evans wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008, Christoph Mallon wrote:
Marius Strobl wrote:
marius 2008-06-25 21:04:59 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
sys/sparc64/include in_cksum.h Log:
SVN rev 180011 on 2008-06-25 21:04:59Z by marius
Use "__asm __volatile&qu
Bruce Evans wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jun 2008, Christoph Mallon wrote:
I still think, using __volatile only works by accident. volatile for
an assembler block mostly means "this asm statement has an effect,
even though the register specification looks otherwise, so do not
optimise this away
Marius Strobl wrote:
On a related note: Is inline assembler really necessary here? For
example couldn't in_addword() be written as
static __inline u_short
in_addword(u_short const sum, u_short const b)
{
u_int const t = sum + b;
return t + (t >> 16);
} ?
This should at least produce equa
Christoph Mallon wrote:
As a compiler construction I can tell you, that regarding optimisation
there is no such thing as "certainty".
Uh...right... s/construction/constructor/
___
cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.o
Marius Strobl wrote:
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 12:56:08AM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
Marius Strobl wrote:
marius 2008-06-27 22:17:14 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
sys/sparc64/include in_cksum.h
Log:
SVN rev 180073 on 2008-06-27 22:17:14Z by marius
Improve
Marius Strobl wrote:
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 02:08:10PM +0200, Christoph Mallon wrote:
Marius Strobl wrote:
On a related note: Is inline assembler really necessary here? For
example couldn't in_addword() be written as
static __inline u_short
in_addword(u_short const sum, u_short co
Bruce Evans wrote:
So by now you are saying that using "__volatile" in this case
is the wrong solution and that using "cc" is a style bug. How
am I supposed to tell the compiler that the inline assembler
alters the condition codes then, which it apparently needs to
know as it at shown to otherwis
Bruce Evans wrote:
I think the bug was the following:
subcc %foo, %bar, %g0 /* SPARC compare */
#APP
/* inline assembler of in_addword() here, which modifies the condition
codes */
#NO_APP
bpl $somewhere /* condition branch depending on condition code */
Is the non-#APP part all from C code?
Bruce Evans wrote:
Right. Though I've never seen unnecessary's __volatiles significantly
affecting i386 code. This is because the code in the asms can't be
removed completely, and can't be moved much either. With out of order
execution, the type of moves that are permitted (not across
depende
Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
ache2007-10-27 22:32:28 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
include _ctype.h
Log:
Micro-optimization of prev. commit, change
(_c < 0 || _c >= 128) to (_c & ~0x7F)
Revision ChangesPath
1.33 +1 -1 src/incl
Andrey Chernov wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 09:48:16PM +0100, Christoph Mallon wrote:
Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
ache2007-10-27 22:32:28 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
include _ctype.h Log:
Micro-optimization of prev. commit, change
(_c < 0 ||
Andrey Chernov wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 03:23:56AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
In fact, one of the cleanups/optimizations in rev.1.5 and 1.6 by ache
and me was to get rid of the mask. There was already a check for _c
< 0, so the mask cost even more. The top limit was 256 instead of
128, so
Andrey Chernov wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 10:33:49PM +, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
For ones who doubts there two tests compiled with -O2. As you may see the
result is almost identical (andl vs cmpl):
Q.E.D. How about to restore original, more reader-friendly version then?
1. Reader-frie
Andrey Chernov wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 02:44:25AM +0100, Christoph Mallon wrote:
Also the example is still unrealistic: You usually don't multiply chars by
two. Lets try something more realistic: an ASCII filter
int filter_ascii0(int c)
{
return c < 0 || c >= 12
Andrey Chernov wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 10:03:31AM -1000, Juli Mallett wrote:
* "Andrey A. Chernov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ 2007-10-27 ]
[ cvs commit: src/include _ctype.h ]
ache2007-10-27 22:32:28 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
include _ct
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
phk 2007-12-01 18:56:50 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
include assert.h
Log:
Add missing #ifndef _ASSERT_H_ protection against multiple inclusions
This change violates ANSI C:
"The assert macro is redefined according to t
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Andrey Chernov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
David Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
test-printfloat is failing on my machine due to the fact that the
default locale in FreeBSD seems to have a thousands separator now.
I thought the default locale wasn't supposed to. C
Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 12:55:42PM -0700, Xin LI wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 12:09:10AM +, Xin LI wrote:
delphij 2008-09-27 00:09:10 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
sbin
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The attached patch unbreaks the build.
With additional hunk to fix usr.bin/netstat/ipx.c, which relied on the
brokenness of .
Hi,
may I suggest to declare the array as
static const char * const tcpstates[].
M
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 12:10:03AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
eh? when I went to see what damage had been caused by this megachange I
found no trace of it at all. Is this an April Fools mail?
Hmm, I think I might have screwed something up :( CVS meisters, please
help
from userid 1000)
id 9EFC6517E2; Sun, 1 Apr 2007 03:13:52 -0400 (EDT)
This is more like Paul Saab's IP address.
freefall.freebsd.org?
On Sun, 1 Apr 2007, Christoph Mallon wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 12:10:03AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
eh? when I we
Max Laier schrieb:
On Saturday 17 March 2007 20:09, Jeff Roberson wrote:
Any language lawyers care to comment on this?
I find this strange. According to the spec "(Decrementing is equivalent
to subtracting 1.)", but "pri = --pri % RQ_NQS;" will behave like you
expect, while "pri = (pri - 1)
Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 05:25:35PM +, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
*ptr++ would choke since pointer arith on (void *) is undefined AFAIK.
I've been under impression that ++ on void * whould simply increase it
by one.
This behaviour is documented for GCC:
http://www.mcs.vuw
Kip Macy wrote:
On Dec 6, 2007 2:25 AM, Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 6 Dec 2007, Kip Macy wrote:
kmacy 2007-12-06 04:00:59 UTC
FreeBSD src repository
Modified files:
sys/sys param.h
Log:
Respect the fact that the value a may be constant so cast to
Erik Trulsson wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 11:55:29AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Yar Tikhiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Excuse me, but did you notice that fts(3) is not a part of sys? It's
generic userland code, albeit it's contaminated by system-dependent
parts for performance or wha
28 matches
Mail list logo
