Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 15:23:38 +0200 From: Christoph Mallon <christoph.mallon@gmx.de> To: Alexander Kabaev <kabaev@gmail.com> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Ed Schouten <ed@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r190919 - in head/sys: amd64/amd64 amd64/include i386/i386 i386/include Message-ID: <49E1EB5A.9010303@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <20090412090551.176f327c@kan.dnsalias.net> References: <200904111401.n3BE1108088009@svn.freebsd.org> <20090411163528.GC46526@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20090411124335.0600a72f@kan.dnsalias.net> <49E1E01C.90704@gmx.de> <20090412090551.176f327c@kan.dnsalias.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alexander Kabaev schrieb: > On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 14:35:40 +0200 > Christoph Mallon <christoph.mallon@gmx.de> wrote: > >> Alexander Kabaev schrieb: >>> On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 09:35:28 -0700 >>> Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 02:01:01PM +0000, Ed Schouten wrote: >>>>> Author: ed >>>>> Date: Sat Apr 11 14:01:01 2009 >>>>> New Revision: 190919 >>>>> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/190919 >>>>> >>>>> Log: >>>>> Simplify in/out functions (for i386 and AMD64). >>>>> >>>>> Remove a hack to generate more efficient code for port numbers >>>>> below 0x100, which has been obsolete for at least ten years, >>>>> because GCC has an asm constraint to specify that. >>>>> >>>>> Submitted by: Christoph Mallon <christoph mallon gmx de> >>>>> >>>> I thought Christoph and bde were still hashing out the correctness >>>> of this patch. >>>> >>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-amd64/2009-April/012064.html >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Steve >>> The patch is inconsistent in regards to usage of volatile vs. >>> __volatile even within itself. I think the code is sloppy and was >>> not ready to be committed yet. Please fix or back out. >> Backing it out because of two underscores (!) would be >> counterproductive: It removes about 150 lines of hard to read hacks, >> which are unnecessary for at least a decade. GCC 2.95, which was >> released in 1999 supports the "N" constraint for inline asm. Perhaps >> olders do, too, but you cannot get older GCCs from the official site. >> Attached is a patch, which replaces all __inline and __volatile in ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> the touched headers by thir ISO equivalents - again there hasn't been ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> a reason to use the alternate GCC keywords for at least a decade. >> Also "inline" and "volatile" are already used hundreds of times in >> sys/. The patch is simply the result of >> %s/\<__\(inline\|volatile\)\>/\1/. >> >> Christoph > > Underscores as the sole reason for backing out might as well be > counterproductive. The real objection was not about underscored > though, but about consistency. Your patch was not consistent itself > and it left files it touched with unholy mixture of plain and We are all doomed! I can almost see the horsemen of apocalypse appearing at the edge of the horizon! You're a /tad/ histrionic. > underscored versions sprinkled all over with no apparent system. > > The way to handle this change was: > 1. Prepare functional patch, commit. > 2. Prepare underscore removal patch, commit. Did you stop reading at the colon of the first sentence? I marked the relevant part above with "^". Christoph
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49E1EB5A.9010303>