From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756607Ab2DMTq5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:46:57 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com ([209.85.212.172]:56090 "EHLO mail-wi0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756025Ab2DMTq4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:46:56 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20120413.152455.900761231064979707.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20120413.152455.900761231064979707.davem@davemloft.net> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 12:46:34 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: d9R54zfNbrZtyeCw5c17I7UZ38g Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT] Sparc To: David Miller Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:24 PM, David Miller wrote: > > With special guest sparc64 assembler hacker, Paul E. McKenney. Oh christ. You're teaching *more* people about sparc64? Where will it end? That said, Looking at the patch, it looks a bit dubious. Why does the cmp %l1, 0 instruction remain, even if the conditional branch was deleted? I'm not seeing any subsequent uses of %icc, but hey, I'm no sparc expert (nor do I want to be). Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 19:46:34 +0000 Subject: Re: [GIT] Sparc Message-Id: List-Id: References: <20120413.152455.900761231064979707.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20120413.152455.900761231064979707.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: David Miller Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:24 PM, David Miller wrote: > > With special guest sparc64 assembler hacker, Paul E. McKenney. Oh christ. You're teaching *more* people about sparc64? Where will it end? That said, Looking at the patch, it looks a bit dubious. Why does the cmp %l1, 0 instruction remain, even if the conditional branch was deleted? I'm not seeing any subsequent uses of %icc, but hey, I'm no sparc expert (nor do I want to be). Linus