Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation [LWN.net]

From:		Andi Kleen <ak-AT-suse.de>
To:		Andrew Morton <akpm-AT-osdl.org>
Subject:		Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
Date:		Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:05:18 +0100
Cc:		Andi Kleen <ak-AT-suse.de>, mingo-AT-elte.hu, dhowells-AT-redhat.com, torvalds-AT-osdl.org, hch-AT-infradead.org, arjan-AT-infradead.org, matthew-AT-wil.cx, linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org, linux-arch-AT-vger.kernel.org
Archive-link:		Article, Thread

On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 01:01:26AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote:
> >
> > Can you please apply the following patch then? 
> > 
> >  Remove -Wdeclaration-after-statement
> 
> OK.
> 
> Thus far I have this:

Would it be possible to drop support for gcc 3.0 too? 
AFAIK it has never been widely used. If we assume 3.1+ minimum it has the 
advantage that named assembly arguments work, which make
the inline assembly often a lot easier to read and maintain.

-Andi

(Log in to post comments)