[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: [PATCH] C undefined behavior fix
> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 11:42 AM
> To:;;
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] C undefined behavior fix
> <<Especially if there are cases were this optimization yields
> a slower =
> access (or even worse indirect bugs).
> E.g. if the referenced "volatile short" is a hardware register and the
> access is multiplexed over a slow 8 bit bus. There are
> embedded systems
> around where this is the case and the (cross-)compiler has no way to
> know this (except it can be told by the programmer).
> >>
> Well that of course is a situation where the compiler is
> being deliberately
> misinformed as to the relative costs of various machine
> instructions, and
> that is definitely a problem. One can even imagine hardware
> (not such a hard
> feat, one of our customers had such hardware) where a word
> access works, but
> a byte access fails due to hardware shortcuts,

Tht's quite often the case with MMIO, and the only portable way to give a
hint to the compiler that it should refrain from optimizing is "volatile";
that's why I think the compiler should not do this optimization on volatile
objects at all.


Bernard Dautrevaux
Microprocess Ingenierie
97 bis, rue de Colombes
Tel: +33 (0) 1 47 68 80 80
Fax: +33 (0) 1 47 88 97 85
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.061 / U:3.332 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site