>> What you want to check for is __sparc_v9__ > > That's not going to be CPP defined either, unfortunately. > > I really think, based upon this, that the hard-coded opcodes have to > stay. It's the only way to cover all cases.
If that's the case, this patch can be ignored. Does the hard-coded opcode account for the branch misprediction errata? Does it need to? I assume it's a write barrier, and if so I'd prefer to change the name of the macro from barrier() to write_mem_barrier() to match with the others. Matt _______________________________________________ xorg-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
