Possible regression in arm/io.h

Artem Bityutskiy dedekind1 at gmail.com
Thu Nov 22 02:57:35 EST 2012


On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 16:27 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 04:04:46PM +0100, Bastian Hecht wrote:
> > >> > Ok, I'll have a look at the impact of moving exclusively to "Q" when I get a
> > >> > chance. Which toolchain are you using?
> > >>
> > >> gcc version 4.6.3 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.3-1ubuntu5)
> > >> For a more verbose info take a look at the bug report link.
> > >
> > > Ok, thanks. One other thing you could try while I try to find a copy of that
> > > toolchain is changing the "+" modifier to an "=", like I proposed in this
> > > version of the patch:
> > 
> > So if alter it to fit to your patch scheme the result is:
> 
> Sorry, the change wasn't as trivial as I thought -- you have to reorder the
> constraints because an output becomes an input for the load accessors. I
> tried it myself and it doesn't fix the issue (I can reproduce it now).

Any progress with this? Do we end up with gcc 4.6+ - uncompilable MTD
drivers in 3.7?

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20121122/169d1411/attachment.sig>


More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list