Lines Matching refs:compiler

26 	compiler from deducing the resulting pointer value.  Please see
28 	for an example where the compiler can in fact deduce the exact
32 	The compiler simply knows too much about integral values to
50 	"(x-(uintptr_t)x)" for char* pointers.	The compiler is within its
89 	explained, if the two pointers are equal, the compiler could
97 	Because the compiler now knows that the value of "p" is exactly
112 		compiler knows that the pointer is NULL, you had better
114 		non-equal, the compiler is none the wiser.  Therefore,
119 		Since there are no subsequent dereferences, the compiler
171 	-	The pointers are not equal -and- the compiler does
174 		will normally prevent the compiler from knowing too much.
176 		However, please note that if the compiler knows that the
179 		compiler needs to deduce the value of the pointer.
181 -	Disable any value-speculation optimizations that your compiler
189 	ordered systems (such as ARM or Power).  Choose your compiler
237 			/* The compiler decides that q->c is same as p->c. */
247 to some reordering from the compiler and CPUs is beside the point.
295 			/* The compiler decides that q->c is same as p->c. */
309 other pointer, the compiler normally has no clue what the value of the
310 first pointer might be.  This lack of knowledge prevents the compiler
313 should prevent the compiler from guessing the value.
315 But without rcu_dereference(), the compiler knows more than you might
348 Because the compiler can see all stores to "gp", it knows that the only
350 on the other.  The comparison in reader() therefore tells the compiler
352 compiler to make the return values independent of the load from "gp",
422 pointers, which can result in "interesting" bugs due to compiler
430 If register pressure is high, the compiler might optimize "p" out