Fldcw, rounding and optimizations

[Jamie Lokier]

Loisel, Sebastien wrote:
> > 2) Is there a way to do this already? I know you can already specify
> > dependencies of asm blocks on variables and such, and I presume this
> > is used in the optimizer to prevent foul-ups. What's the best way of
> > convincing gcc not to move my asm blocks around?
> 
> Nothing to see here, move along. I just found out about asm volatile. Sorry for the noise.

Does it fix your problem?

-- Jamie