From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 56242 invoked by alias); 16 Nov 2015 13:42:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 56231 invoked by uid 89); 16 Nov 2015 13:42:27 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 13:42:27 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 064CAA85; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 13:42:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn1-5-35.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.5.35]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id tAGDgOCU029384; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 08:42:25 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH, x86] Fix posix_memalign declaration in mm_malloc.h To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org References: <564619AE.4020108@arm.com> <56464EF6.70302@redhat.com> Cc: Szabolcs Nagy , "H.J. Lu" , Rich Felker From: Bernd Schmidt Message-ID: <5649DD40.3030606@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 13:42:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-11/txt/msg01947.txt.bz2 On 11/13/2015 11:30 PM, Marc Glisse wrote: >>> +__asm__("posix_memalign"); >> >> Can't say I like the __asm__ after the #if/#else/#endif block. > > It might also cause trouble if some systems like to prepend an > underscore, maybe? Yeah, that's one of the things I had in mind when I suggested moving this code to libgcc.a instead. Referring to a library symbol in this way makes me nervous. Bernd