Re: Not-terribly-safe checks for CRC intrinsic support
От | John Naylor |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Not-terribly-safe checks for CRC intrinsic support |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CANWCAZapfYkk+vqF+qeomOE7-0uFbPRJ=U=n3ghMxF_4-gAkCQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Not-terribly-safe checks for CRC intrinsic support (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Not-terribly-safe checks for CRC intrinsic support
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 6:04 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > In short, I think we ought to apply and perhaps back-patch something > like the attached. Seems like reasonable defensive coding and consistency. - /* return computed value, to prevent the above being optimized away */ + /* else this function could get optimized away altogether: */ - /* return computed value, to prevent the above being optimized away */ + /* return computed value, just to be extra sure this isn't optimized away */ I'd be okay with keeping the original comment, though, since it seems to be explaining the choice well enough. > BTW, it looks to me like PGAC_AVX512_POPCNT_INTRINSICS is at similar > hazard, but I'm not entirely sure how to fix that one. "buf" is the variable there that we're loading from, so that would be the one to make global. -- John Naylor Amazon Web Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: