Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!)

[Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>]

Richard Kenner wrote:

> The issue is that we currently don't combine if volatile is anywhere in
> sight, whether or not we'd be affecting that access. Just because you have
> something volatile on the LHS doesn't mean we can't combine into the RHS.  A
> good example are addressing modes: if we have a MEM->MEM copy with one side
> volatile, doing anything inside the addressing computation of either (even
> the volatile one) is perfectly safe.

OK, in that case you have to add to the list of restrictions that you
never combine volatile references. I did not see that in the list.