This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: powerpc & unaligned block moves with fp registers
- From: dewar at gnat dot com (Robert Dewar)
- To: dalej at apple dot com, mrs at apple dot com
- Cc: dj at redhat dot com, dje at watson dot ibm dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 07:21:04 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: powerpc & unaligned block moves with fp registers
> We should be very careful to not remove `working' and reasonable
> semantics that are widely implemented and depended on by existing code,
> just because some standard can be read in such a way that suggest that
> something might not be mandated to work.
I would think that many C programs assume that access to a volatile variable
is in fact atomic if the machine can easily generate instructions to make
it so, given that standard C lacks a mechanism for specifying atomic access,
so I would agree with Mike that you want to be careful here on making changes.