[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: gnumach FTBFS
From: |
Samuel Thibault |
Subject: |
Re: gnumach FTBFS |
Date: |
Wed, 18 May 2011 23:39:23 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14 |
Svante Signell, le Wed 18 May 2011 20:34:08 +0200, a écrit :
> > Well, actually in that case it'll be the same. But it's much more clear
> > to announce the memory as being both read&written ("+m") than announcing
> > it as read and also as written ("m" and "=m").
>
> Can you tell if the change has any effect on the produced code or not?
It doesn't change any semantic at all, so shouldn't change the code.
> At least we get rid of a lot of warnings when compiling, and according
> to the output no registers are used without the change?? Did you change
> that code, and if so how?
No code change at all, it's just another way to express the same thing.
Samuel
- Re: gnumach FTBFS: Was Re: Race condition in Mach/Hurd?, (continued)
- Re: gnumach FTBFS: Was Re: Race condition in Mach/Hurd?, Samuel Thibault, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS, Svante Signell, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS, Thomas Schwinge, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS, Svante Signell, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS, Svante Signell, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS, Svante Signell, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS, Samuel Thibault, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS, Svante Signell, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS, Samuel Thibault, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS, Svante Signell, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS,
Samuel Thibault <=
- Re: gnumach FTBFS, Svante Signell, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS, Svante Signell, 2011/05/18
- Re: gnumach FTBFS: Was Re: Race condition in Mach/Hurd?, Samuel Thibault, 2011/05/19
- Re: gnumach FTBFS: Was Re: Race condition in Mach/Hurd?, Svante Signell, 2011/05/19
- Re: gnumach FTBFS: Was Re: Race condition in Mach/Hurd?, Samuel Thibault, 2011/05/19
Re: Race condition in Mach/Hurd?, Svante Signell, 2011/05/10