On 06.09.2008 23:22, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
On 06.09.2008 22:34, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
v3 uses all combinations of __asm__, asm, __volatile__, volatile and single variations to declare inline asm statements. "asm" is a GNU C extension, while volatile is ANSI C. That means:
- __volatile__ can be replaced by volatile unless you use a pure K&R
compiler.
- asm is not a reserved keyword and should be replaced by __asm__.
As a bonus, grepping for __asm__ returns less hits than asm because asm is also used as a normal word in comments.
What are the implications of this? I think we should either go __asm__ __volatile__ or asm volatile for the sake of looking at the code without eye cancer, but not mix it.
We're absolutely gcc specific, so discussing about asm not being reserved sounds a bit vain. Also, is __asm__ reserved? Reserved by whom? I know more compilers that know about asm than __asm__ if we're really trying to become non-GNU-centric.
What's the goal of your patch?
Two goals:
- __volatile__ is pointless since 1983 (ANSI-C). No idea why anyone
uses it. 2. Neither __asm__ nor asm are reserved. Grepping for asm turns up lots of stuff that is not inline asm, so using __asm__ eases grepping.
If you prefer asm volatile, tell me. I'll prepare an updated patch.
Stefan, do you prefer "asm volatile" or "__asm__ __volatile__"? From your mail, it seems you prefer "asm volatile", but I want to make sure I get it right. This patch has been pending for quite a while and it would be great if I could get rid of it.
Regards, Carl-Daniel