Does your change to sysdeps/i386/i486/bits/string.h really work?
Andreas Jaeger
aj@suse.de
Sun Apr 14 14:48:00 GMT 2002
"H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
> With your change
>
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-hacker/2002-03/msg00060.html
>
> I got
>
> ../sysdeps/i386/i486/bits/string.h:1541: Can't find a register in class
> `GENERAL_REGS' while reloading `asm'.
>
> when I built glibc with -D__USE_STRING_INLINES using gcc 2.96 and gcc
Argh. I didn't use that flag. Without it everything passed for me.
> 3.1 20020408. It died on intl/loadmsgcat.os. -D__USE_STRING_INLINES
> and -fPIC won't work together.
Here's a patch that I've committed after testing with GCC 2.95.3 and
a current GCC 3.1,
Andreas
2002-04-13 Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>
* sysdeps/i386/i486/bits/string.h (__strcspn_cg): Use only memory
as clobber to reduce register pressure.
(__strpbrk_cg): Likewise.
(__mempcpy_by4): Likewise.
Add prototype for __memrchr.
============================================================
Index: sysdeps/i386/i486/bits/string.h
--- sysdeps/i386/i486/bits/string.h 26 Mar 2002 19:45:30 -0000 1.48
+++ sysdeps/i386/i486/bits/string.h 14 Apr 2002 06:16:27 -0000
@@ -463,6 +463,8 @@ memchr (__const void *__s, int __c, size
#define _HAVE_STRING_ARCH_memrchr 1
#ifndef _FORCE_INLINES
+__STRING_INLINE void *__memrchr (__const void *__s, int __c, size_t __n);
+
__STRING_INLINE void *
__memrchr (__const void *__s, int __c, size_t __n)
{
@@ -729,11 +731,9 @@ __mempcpy_by4 (char *__dest, __const cha
"leal 4(%1),%1\n\t"
"decl %3\n\t"
"jnz 1b"
- : "=&r" (__d0), "=r" (__tmp), "=&r" (__src), "=&r" (__d1),
- "=m" ( *(struct { __extension__ char __x[__srclen]; } *)__dest)
- : "1" (__tmp), "2" (__src), "3" (__srclen / 4),
- "m" ( *(struct { __extension__ char __x[__srclen]; } *)__src)
- : "cc");
+ : "=&r" (__d0), "=r" (__tmp), "=&r" (__src), "=&r" (__d1)
+ : "1" (__tmp), "2" (__src), "3" (__srclen / 4)
+ : "memory", "cc");
return __tmp;
}
@@ -1535,10 +1535,8 @@ __strcspn_cg (__const char *__s, __const
"jne 1b\n"
"2:"
: "=S" (__res), "=&a" (__d0), "=&c" (__d1), "=&D" (__d2)
- : "0" (__s), "d" (__reject), "g" (__reject_len),
- "m" ( *(struct { char __x[0xfffffff]; } *)__s),
- "m" ( *(struct { __extension__ char __x[__reject_len]; } *)__reject)
- : "cc");
+ : "0" (__s), "d" (__reject), "g" (__reject_len)
+ : "memory", "cc");
return (__res - 1) - __s;
}
@@ -1657,6 +1655,7 @@ __strspn_cg (__const char *__s, __const
"2:"
: "=S" (__res), "=&d" (__d0), "=&c" (__d1), "=&D" (__d2)
: "0" (__s), "1" (__accept), "g" (__accept_len),
+ /* Since we do not know how large the memory we access it, use a really large amount. */
"m" ( *(struct { char __x[0xfffffff]; } *)__s),
"m" ( *(struct { __extension__ char __x[__accept_len]; } *)__accept)
: "cc");
@@ -1755,10 +1754,8 @@ __strpbrk_cg (__const char *__s, __const
"xorl %0,%0\n"
"3:"
: "=S" (__res), "=&a" (__d0), "=&c" (__d1), "=&D" (__d2)
- : "0" (__s), "d" (__accept), "g" (__accept_len),
- "m" ( *(struct { char __x[0xfffffff]; } *)__s),
- "m" ( *(struct { __extension__ char __x[__accept_len]; } *)__accept)
- : "cc");
+ : "0" (__s), "d" (__accept), "g" (__accept_len)
+ : "memory", "cc");
return __res;
}
@@ -1865,11 +1862,8 @@ __strstr_cg (__const char *__haystack, _
"xorl %%eax,%%eax\n"
"2:"
: "=a" (__res), "=&S" (__d0), "=&D" (__d1), "=&c" (__d2)
- : "g" (__needle_len), "1" (__haystack), "d" (__needle),
- /* Since we do not know how large the memory we access it, use a really large amount. */
- "m" ( *(struct { char __x[0xfffffff]; } *)__haystack),
- "m" ( *(struct { __extension__ char __x[__needle_len]; } *)__needle)
- : "cc");
+ : "g" (__needle_len), "1" (__haystack), "d" (__needle)
+ : "memory", "cc");
return __res;
}
--
Andreas Jaeger
SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
private aj@arthur.inka.de
http://www.suse.de/~aj
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list