Lines Matching refs:compiler

23 	compiler from deducing the resulting pointer value.  Please see
25 	for an example where the compiler can in fact deduce the exact
29 	The compiler simply knows too much about integral values to
47 	"(x-(uintptr_t)x)" for char* pointers.	The compiler is within its
86 	explained, if the two pointers are equal, the compiler could
94 	Because the compiler now knows that the value of "p" is exactly
109 		compiler knows that the pointer is NULL, you had better
111 		non-equal, the compiler is none the wiser.  Therefore,
116 		Since there are no subsequent dereferences, the compiler
168 	o	The pointers are not equal -and- the compiler does
171 		will normally prevent the compiler from knowing too much.
173 		However, please note that if the compiler knows that the
176 		compiler needs to deduce the value of the pointer.
178 o	Disable any value-speculation optimizations that your compiler
186 	ordered systems (such as ARM or Power).  Choose your compiler
233 			/* The compiler decides that q->c is same as p->c. */
243 to some reordering from the compiler and CPUs is beside the point.
291 			/* The compiler decides that q->c is same as p->c. */
304 other pointer, the compiler normally has no clue what the value of the
305 first pointer might be.  This lack of knowledge prevents the compiler
308 should prevent the compiler from guessing the value.
310 But without rcu_dereference(), the compiler knows more than you might
343 Because the compiler can see all stores to "gp", it knows that the only
345 on the other.  The comparison in reader() therefore tells the compiler
347 compiler to make the return values independent of the load from "gp",
415 pointers, which can result in "interesting" bugs due to compiler
423 If register pressure is high, the compiler might optimize "p" out