On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:It doesn't. I guess I don't care that much, since explicitly asking for some odd-ball case does indicate that you want a very specific kernel. I guess that's ok. I'm certainly not violently against it. Of course, I also suspect that we _could_ fix it so that things like memcpy really only have two cases: - the special inlined "rep movs" thing. Although I'm not actually sure gcc even does this, and I don't think we force it any more. - If doing a function call, we could just fix things up to be more dynamic. Of course, the fixups for the SMP cases are scary (ie we'd probably have to first change it to a one-byte "int $3" instruction, then change the target, and then write the first byte back - and handle any race with another CPU by fixing up the trap). but I dunno. Linus --
| Steven Rostedt | Re: Major regression on hackbench with SLUB |
| Jeremy Fitzhardinge | [PATCH 02 of 36] x86: add memory clobber to save/loadsegment |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Paul Jackson | Re: cpuset-remove-sched-domain-hooks-from-cpusets |
git: | |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Arjan van de Ven | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 03/37] dccp: List management for new feature negotiation |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH iproute2] Re: HTB accuracy for high speed |
