Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:11:07AM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote:
>> This patch-set deals with an interesting yet stupid problem: code that
>> does not get inlined despite its simplicity.
>
> I got the 0/8 patch twice, and didn't get the 1/8 patch. Was there an
> issue with th
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:11:07AM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote:
> This patch-set deals with an interesting yet stupid problem: code that
> does not get inlined despite its simplicity.
I got the 0/8 patch twice, and didn't get the 1/8 patch. Was there an
issue with the sending of the patches?
--
Jos
Nadav Amit wrote:
> This patch-set deals with an interesting yet stupid problem: code that
> does not get inlined despite its simplicity.
>
> I find 5 classes of causes:
>
> 1. Inline assembly blocks in which code and data are added to
> alternative sections. The compiler is oblivious to the co
This patch-set deals with an interesting yet stupid problem: code that
does not get inlined despite its simplicity.
I find 5 classes of causes:
1. Inline assembly blocks in which code and data are added to
alternative sections. The compiler is oblivious to the content of the
blocks and assumes th
This patch-set deals with an interesting yet stupid problem: code that
does not get inlined despite its simplicity.
I find 5 classes of causes:
1. Inline assembly blocks in which code and data are added to
alternative sections. The compiler is oblivious to the content of the
blocks and assumes th
5 matches
Mail list logo
