DragonFly BSD
DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2003-11
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Non-gcc compilers

From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 23:21:43 +0100

Matthew Dillon schrieb:

Hi Alexander. This is very interesting work.

Please check if you have the patch with the in_cksum.c diff (using the asm version doesn't work with icc, ATM I don't know if this is a bug in the asm or in icc).

    Jeroen, I don't think it can be committed straight, there are some
    issues I would like to rework... the __INTEL_COMPILER stuff, for
    example, is a pretty bad hack.   I would prefer creating a
    __INLINES_SUPPORTED__ def in sys/cdefs.h.

The cdefs.h changes are because of gcc extensions. And I'm not sure if every place where I use __INTEL_COMPILER or __ICC includes cdefs.h, so it may be necessary to include the "__INLINES_SUPPORTED__" detection into more than one file.

Let me do a first test/commit pass on it to try to reduce the size of the external patch set. This may break the patch set for a short
period until Alexander can catch up.

I tried to make the patch short and non-intrusive. Not every compiler is supposed to know about gcc extensions or the syntax of gcc inlines, so I think you should name the defines __GCC_STYLE_INLINES_SUPPORTED__ and __GCC_EXTENSIONS_SUPPORTED__ (the last one may be misleading, as not every extension may be used, e.g. the printf0 attribute is FreeBSD specific, and icc doesn't know about it). As icc is supposed to be usable as a replacement for gcc (and icc v8 will define __GNUC__ when it gets released), I extended the actual compiler specific parts instead of creating "general" feature tests.

I'm open to suggestions.


[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]