Re: Deprecating basic asm in a function - What now?

[Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>]

On 06/22/2016 09:23 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> On the other hand, some of the the x86_64 examples in lib/raid6/sse2.c are
> super scary and have back-to-back instructions with hard-coded registers...
>
> 	asm volatile("pcmpgtb %xmm4,%xmm5");
> 	asm volatile("paddb %xmm4,%xmm4");
> 	asm volatile("pand %xmm0,%xmm5");
>
> I can't defend them, and they look very fragile! Fixing this code would
> require more substantial work.
Yow!  This kind of crap is all over that file.  Fragile indeed!

> Jeff and others have already come out against this patch, I'd like to add
> my vote against it too.
To be clear, given all I've seen I would actively object at this point. 
We can't inflict this much pain on the user base.

jeff