lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRE: [patch 2.6.19-rc6] Stop gcc 4.1.0 optimizing wait_hpet_tick away

>> Next you stick a my_other_func declaration in a header and use
>> my_other_func instead of my_func() in the main function. Now the
>> result is that the compiler has no damn clue what my_other_func()
>> contains so it can't optimize it out of the loop with either
>> version. You cannot treat "volatile" the way you are saying it is
>> treated without severely violating both the C99 spec *and* common sense.
>
>The compiler *happens* to have no damn clue because such inter-module
>optimizations don't exist. That doesn't make the code correct, just not
>likely to demonstrate its brokenness.

GCC has inter-module optimization, it's just not used everyday. I think
I have seen a discussion on this.

Right there it is -> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/8/24/212



-`J'
--
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-12-02 10:07    [W:1.652 / U:0.796 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site