This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Hi! On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 06:34:57 -0500, Ulrich Drepper <drepper@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 09:16, Steven Munroe <munroesj@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > Now if you think only PowerPC has these issue, consider all the random > > attempts to use the rdtsc instruction you might have seen, and how > > useful it would be to have one well defined and correct version every > > one could use. > > If this is a fair comparison then it is also clear that this > discussion is completely misplaced here. Something as trivial as > rdtsc should be handled in the same way as said instruction is: in a > header in gcc. This way you also reach programmers who are not using > glibc but instead gcc on other platforms. > > Since this was brought up on the glibc list I have to assume there is > more to it. And that means your argumentation is deliberately > misleading. I also wondered about these two issues: why is this to be part of the sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/ hierarchy, given there is nothing Linux-specific to it (as far as I can tell), and why is this to be in glibc at all, given there is nothing libc-specific to it (as far as I can tell)? I likewise would assume to find such a generic ``ISA helper header'' as part of the compiler itself. GrÃÃe, Thomas
Attachment:
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |