Hi,
Given the code
class C { void f(int *p); int q; };
void C::f(int * __restrict p) __restrict {
q += 10;
*p = 7;
q += 10;
}
g++ 4.5.2 with -O3 generates the following for C::f() (prologue and
epilogue omitted):
mov0x8(%ebp),%eax // eax = this (= &q)
mov0xc(%ebp),%ecx // e
On 10/01/2011 02:55 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
"The compiler must ensure that for any given object, it either ALWAYS
inlines lock free routines, OR calls the external routines. For any
given object, these cannot be intermixed."
Why? You give an example explaining why it is fine to link 386 and
Snapshot gcc-4.7-20111001 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.7-20111001/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.7 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
Hi,
>
> This isn't actually necessary, they just need to make their test harness a
> bit
> smarter.
[snip]
Fair enough, I'm going to close the PR as invalid with a link to your
explanation.
Thanks!
Paolo
