This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: simplify_subreg issues

To: Geoff Keating <geoffk at redhat dot com>
Subject: Re: simplify_subreg issues
From: Florian Weimer <Florian dot Weimer at RUS dot Uni-Stuttgart dot DE>
Date: 12 Jun 2001 11:26:56 +0200
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <20010611190907Y.mitchell@codesourcery.com><200106120256.TAA04600@geoffk.org>

Geoff Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org> writes:

> The underlying problem is that 'volatile' doesn't make sense in
> conjunction with 'complex'.  

Why do you think so?

> We can't do complex loads or stores.

The volatile qualifier has not much to do with atomicity of access, at
least according to the C standard.  For example, the C standard
requires that accesses to volatile objects are not reordered accross
sequence points.

-- 
Florian Weimer 	                  Florian.Weimer@RUS.Uni-Stuttgart.DE
University of Stuttgart           http://cert.uni-stuttgart.de/
RUS-CERT                          +49-711-685-5973/fax +49-711-685-5898

References:
- simplify_subreg issues
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: simplify_subreg issues
  - From: Geoff Keating

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]