This is the mail archive of the gcc-help@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: __sync_lock_test_and_set on ARM

From: Andrew Haley <aph-gcc at littlepinkcloud dot COM>
To: David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>
Cc: Phil Endecott <spam_from_gcc_help_2 at chezphil dot org>, gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:18:49 +0100
Subject: Re: __sync_lock_test_and_set on ARM
References: <18152.4360.206678.946828@zebedee.pink> <1189615428802@dmwebmail.japan.chezphil.org> <46E81B57.7010200@avtrex.com>

David Daney writes:
 > 
 > My personal preference would be to use the GCC builtins when
 > possible.  If they are not generating proper code for your target,
 > file a bug report so they can be fixed.

Mine too, but pre-ARM v6 the builtins can't be done in userland, so
what should gcc generate?  Syscalls?

Andrew.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: __sync_lock_test_and_set on ARM
  - From: Phil Endecott
- Re: __sync_lock_test_and_set on ARM
  - From: David Daney

References:
- Re: __sync_lock_test_and_set on ARM
  - From: Andrew Haley
- Re: __sync_lock_test_and_set on ARM
  - From: Phil Endecott
- Re: __sync_lock_test_and_set on ARM
  - From: David Daney

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