From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "Woodhouse, David" <david.woodhouse@intel.com>
Cc: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@freescale.com>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@pobox.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] arm: use built-in byte swap function
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:42:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130129174249.GB25415@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1359478014.3529.157.camel@shinybook.infradead.org>
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:46:58PM +0000, Woodhouse, David wrote:
> If we're really going to have many different architectures depending
> on different versions of GCC for this (if it wasn't sane to use
> it from 4.4/4.8 when it got introduced, and depends on some later
> arch-specific optimisation), then perhaps we'll have the arch
> provide the corresponding required GCC_VERSION for using each of
> 64/32/16 bit builtins, instead of just a yes/no flag? Or just define
> __HAVE_BUILTIN_BSWAPxx__ for itself, perhaps?
Damn, there's already the __powerpc__ thing in there.
Yeah, something like defininig __HAVE_BUILTIN_BSWAPxx__ makes sense and
can keep the header arch-agnostic without growing all those different
arch defines.
But I liked your other suggestion better to get the offending compilers
fixed.
I dunno though, how generically is stuff like that getting implemented
for every arch so probably single arches doing __HAVE* defines is
probably going to be the realizable solution in the end.
Hmmm.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: bp@alien8.de (Borislav Petkov)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC] arm: use built-in byte swap function
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:42:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130129174249.GB25415@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1359478014.3529.157.camel@shinybook.infradead.org>
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:46:58PM +0000, Woodhouse, David wrote:
> If we're really going to have many different architectures depending
> on different versions of GCC for this (if it wasn't sane to use
> it from 4.4/4.8 when it got introduced, and depends on some later
> arch-specific optimisation), then perhaps we'll have the arch
> provide the corresponding required GCC_VERSION for using each of
> 64/32/16 bit builtins, instead of just a yes/no flag? Or just define
> __HAVE_BUILTIN_BSWAPxx__ for itself, perhaps?
Damn, there's already the __powerpc__ thing in there.
Yeah, something like defininig __HAVE_BUILTIN_BSWAPxx__ makes sense and
can keep the header arch-agnostic without growing all those different
arch defines.
But I liked your other suggestion better to get the offending compilers
fixed.
I dunno though, how generically is stuff like that getting implemented
for every arch so probably single arches doing __HAVE* defines is
probably going to be the realizable solution in the end.
Hmmm.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-29 17:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 127+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-29 1:30 [RFC] arm: use built-in byte swap function Kim Phillips
2013-01-29 1:30 ` Kim Phillips
2013-01-29 8:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-01-29 8:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-01-29 16:46 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-29 16:46 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-29 17:42 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2013-01-29 17:42 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-01-29 17:55 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-29 17:55 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-29 18:10 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-01-29 18:10 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-01-30 10:22 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-30 10:22 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-31 2:09 ` Kim Phillips
2013-01-31 2:09 ` Kim Phillips
2013-01-31 6:44 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-01-31 6:44 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-01-31 9:28 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-01-31 9:28 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-01-31 20:59 ` Kim Phillips
2013-01-31 20:59 ` Kim Phillips
2013-01-31 21:33 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-01-31 21:33 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-01-31 22:11 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-31 22:11 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-01 0:37 ` [PATCH v4] " Kim Phillips
2013-02-01 0:37 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-01 10:46 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-01 10:46 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-01 1:17 ` [RFC] " Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-01 1:17 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-01 7:33 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-01 7:33 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-06 3:04 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-06 3:04 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-06 9:02 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-06 9:02 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-07 1:19 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-07 1:19 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-07 10:19 ` Will Newton
2013-02-07 10:19 ` Will Newton
2013-02-07 10:43 ` Catalin Marinas
2013-02-07 10:43 ` Catalin Marinas
2013-02-07 18:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-07 18:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-08 17:25 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-08 17:25 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-08 20:04 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-08 20:04 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-08 22:40 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-08 22:40 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-08 22:47 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-08 22:47 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-09 1:12 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-09 1:12 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-09 3:16 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-09 3:16 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-20 2:31 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-20 2:31 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-20 2:38 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-02-20 2:38 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-02-20 3:17 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-20 3:17 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-20 10:38 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-20 10:38 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-20 13:36 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-20 13:36 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-20 13:44 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-20 13:44 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-20 14:06 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-20 14:06 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-20 14:53 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-20 14:53 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-20 15:43 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-20 15:43 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-21 3:49 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-21 3:49 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-21 4:29 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-21 4:29 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-21 6:52 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-21 6:52 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-21 16:40 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-21 16:40 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-22 2:33 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-22 2:33 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-22 3:40 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-22 3:40 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-23 1:40 ` [PATCH v6] " Kim Phillips
2013-02-23 1:40 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-23 2:40 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-23 2:40 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-23 23:20 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-23 23:20 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-05-23 16:46 ` [PATCH v7] " Kim Phillips
2013-05-23 16:46 ` Kim Phillips
2013-05-23 20:09 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-05-23 20:09 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-05-23 23:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 23:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-06-06 22:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-06-06 22:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-06-06 22:23 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-06-06 22:23 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-06-07 0:03 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-06-07 0:03 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-05-26 5:38 ` Dirk Behme
2013-05-26 9:30 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-10-27 2:41 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-10-27 2:41 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-05 21:45 ` Kim Phillips
2013-11-05 21:45 ` Kim Phillips
2013-02-21 16:37 ` [RFC] " Woodhouse, David
2013-02-21 16:37 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-02-21 17:27 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-21 17:27 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-03-13 13:35 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-03-13 13:35 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-29 14:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-01-29 14:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-01-29 14:43 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-29 14:43 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-29 14:53 ` Rob Herring
2013-01-29 14:53 ` Rob Herring
2013-01-29 15:10 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-29 15:10 ` Woodhouse, David
2013-01-31 11:44 Woodhouse, David
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130129174249.GB25415@pd.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=daniel.santos@pobox.com \
--cc=david.woodhouse@intel.com \
--cc=kim.phillips@freescale.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.