Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 07 Nov 2018 13:50:28 -0800
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <7bc80811-8ab3-d26a-6fb3-b7aeebcfce43@deltatee.com>
References: <20181003213100.189959-1-namit@vmware.com> <20181003213100.189959-3-namit@vmware.com> <89262174-6f15-6116-e67f-436f7c1bfe99@deltatee.com> <6651971B-E3AB-4CDD-868C-2338593F7D83@vmware.com> <d0812681-4a8f-8cc4-24ce-d02002ee34d2@deltatee.com> <DC1EA50F-FAC3-4750-BCF7-0622D1FB4756@vmware.com> <a3902c4c-64b1-9c49-02fb-d5e4c9b04314@deltatee.com> <192946CF-8543-4CF5-B2A3-93674FCD07E2@vmware.com> <7bc80811-8ab3-d26a-6fb3-b7aeebcfce43@deltatee.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 02/10] Makefile: Prepare for using macros for inline asm
To:     Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
        Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
CC:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
        Stephen Bates <sbates@raithlin.com>
From:   hpa@zytor.com
Message-ID: <85B77A64-5FF3-4B82-8A07-E045E259C985@zytor.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On November 7, 2018 1:43:39 PM PST, Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com> wrote:
>
>
>On 2018-11-07 11:56 a.m., Nadav Amit wrote:
>> HPA indicated more than once that this is wrong (and that was indeed
>my
>> initial solution), since it is not guaranteed that the compiler would
>put
>> the macro assembly before its use.
>
>Hmm, that's very unfortunate. I don't really understand why the
>compiler
>would not put the macro assembly in the same order as it appears in the
>code and it would be in the correct order there.
>
>In any case, I've submitted a couple of issues to icecc[1] and
>distcc[2]
>to see if they have any ideas about supporting this on their sides.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Logan
>
>[1] https://github.com/icecc/icecream/issues/428
>[2] https://github.com/distcc/distcc/issues/312

Apparently gcc will treat them like basic blocks and possibly move them around.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.