search for: 1024590

Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "1024590".

Did you mean: 102459
2018 Dec 17
3
[PATCH v3 00/12] x86, kbuild: revert macrofying inline assembly code
...proach is more straight-forward, and readable. Basically, this idea should work because it is what we already do for __ASM_FORM() etc. [Quick Test of "asm inline" of GCC 9] If you want to try "asm inline" feature, the patch is available: https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1024590/ The number of symbols for arch/x86/configs/x86_64_defconfig: nr_symbols [1] v4.20-rc7 : 96502 [2] [1]+full revert : 96705 (+203) [3] [2]+"asm inline": 96568 (-137) [3]: apply my patch, then replace "asm" -> "...
2018 Dec 17
3
[PATCH v3 00/12] x86, kbuild: revert macrofying inline assembly code
...proach is more straight-forward, and readable. Basically, this idea should work because it is what we already do for __ASM_FORM() etc. [Quick Test of "asm inline" of GCC 9] If you want to try "asm inline" feature, the patch is available: https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1024590/ The number of symbols for arch/x86/configs/x86_64_defconfig: nr_symbols [1] v4.20-rc7 : 96502 [2] [1]+full revert : 96705 (+203) [3] [2]+"asm inline": 96568 (-137) [3]: apply my patch, then replace "asm" -> "...
2018 Dec 17
0
[PATCH v2] x86, kbuild: revert macrofying inline assembly code
...; although I am scared by endless Makefile hacks. > Please regard my comments regarding v1. I will try my best, although I felt some of your requests were too much. I am not an x86 developer. I posted this so people can play with 'asm inline' https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1024590/ You can confirm vmlinux size is increased, and some symbols disappears. > I must admit that I?m very surprised > that you don?t like the patches since you ack?d the original patch-set I think ack and "I like it" are different. There are situations where we had to accept some...
2018 Dec 19
0
[PATCH v3 00/12] x86, kbuild: revert macrofying inline assembly code
...d readable. > Basically, this idea should work because it is what we already do for > __ASM_FORM() etc. > > [Quick Test of "asm inline" of GCC 9] > > If you want to try "asm inline" feature, the patch is available: > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1024590/ > > The number of symbols for arch/x86/configs/x86_64_defconfig: > > nr_symbols > [1] v4.20-rc7 : 96502 > [2] [1]+full revert : 96705 (+203) > [3] [2]+"asm inline": 96568 (-137) > > [3]: apply my pat...
2012 Aug 28
0
[LLVMdev] How to write a regression test case?
hi,yang: thanks,i replaced "{helloworld}" with "helloworld" as you said,and the test run well on llvm version 3.0,but fail on llvm 162227,is it right? llvm version 162227 do not support it? your, changcheng On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Triple Yang <triple.yang at gmail.com> wrote: > 2012/8/28 Changcheng Wang <changcheng at multicorewareinc.com>: >>