This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [BUG mm] "fixed" i386 memcpy inlining buggy

From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
To: Christophe Saout <christophe at saout dot de>
Cc: Denis Vlasenko <vda at port dot imtp dot ilyichevsk dot odessa dot ua>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, jakub at redhat dot com, Gerold Jury <gerold dot ml at inode dot at>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm at osdl dot org>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 13:36:05 +0100
Subject: Re: [BUG mm] "fixed" i386 memcpy inlining buggy
References: <200503291542.j2TFg4ER027715@earth.phy.uc.edu><200504021526.53990.vda@ilport.com.ua><1112718844.22591.15.camel@leto.cs.pocnet.net><200504061314.27740.vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua><1112789157.32279.13.camel@leto.cs.pocnet.net>

I'm having a little difficulty understanding what this is for.  Is it
that gcc's builtin memcpy expander generates bad code, or that older
versions of gcc generate bad code, or what?  gcc generates too much
code?

Andrew.

References:
- Re: memcpy(a,b,CONST) is not inlined by gcc 3.4.1 in Linux kernel
  - From: Denis Vlasenko
- [BUG mm] "fixed" i386 memcpy inlining buggy
  - From: Christophe Saout
- Re: [BUG mm] "fixed" i386 memcpy inlining buggy
  - From: Denis Vlasenko
- Re: [BUG mm] "fixed" i386 memcpy inlining buggy
  - From: Christophe Saout

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]