Re: gnumach FTBFS
Svante Signell, le Wed 18 May 2011 17:41:50 +0200, a écrit :
> On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 17:08 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Svante Signell, le Wed 18 May 2011 16:54:24 +0200, a écrit :
> ..
> > > Is this OK? There is also a similar case in the glibc code.
> >
> > Where?
>
> See below:
Ok, the same fix applies indeed.
> Changing "1" and "2" to "m" made the warnings disappear. But
> you say that this is not the correct solution. Care to explain what that
> code is doing and what the changes mean?
Well, actually in that case it'll be the same. But it's much more clear
to announce the memory as being both read&written ("+m") than announcing
it as read and also as written ("m" and "=m").
For more details, see tutorials & documentation about assembly
constraints.
Samuel
Reply to: