Richard Guenther wrote: >Richard is right - it's enough that the inlined version doesn't agree with >whatever smartness is in libgcc. > Like? If you are inlining atomic operations this means that you are passing -march=i686, therefore in order to run the code in the first place the machine has to be an i686, and libgcc certainly knows that.
In principle I can see now that you can do absolutely new things wrt atomic operations in the application and keep around an old libgcc, not even able to deal with the newer machine (which supports the former), but I'd like to see something less theoretical. Paolo.
