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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: volatile [was: GCC warnings for unused global variables]

From: Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>
To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
Cc: Michael Eager <eager at eagercon dot com>, Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs dot mu dot OZ dot AU>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Geoff Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>, jbuck at synopsys dot com, espie at quatramaran dot ens dot fr, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 15:58:24 -0700
Subject: Re: volatile [was: GCC warnings for unused global variables]

On Tuesday, May 6, 2003, at 09:03 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

On May 7, 2003, Michael Eager <eager@eagercon.com> wrote:

If you take the view that "a <op>= b" involves a read and a write, then translating it into load/operate/store is correct.
But then, so is a single instruction that loads, operates then stores,
right?  The thing is that GCC doesn't ever give such instruction a
chance if the variable is volatile.

But, obviously, it should be made to. No one has bothered in getting it into the compiler, yet.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: volatile [was: GCC warnings for unused global variables]
  - From: Richard Henderson

References:
- Re: volatile [was: GCC warnings for unused global variables]
  - From: Alexandre Oliva

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