[Devel] Re: [PATCH] mark read_crX() asm code as volatile
Andi Kleen
ak at suse.de
Wed Oct 3 01:45:05 PDT 2007
>
> How does the compiler know it doesn't depend on memory?
When it has no m (or equivalent like g) constrained argument
and no memory clobber.
> How do you say it depends on memory?
You add any of the above.
> You really need something as heavy as volatile?
You could do a memory clobber, but it would be heavier than the volatile
because the memory clobber clobbers all cached variables. volatile essentially
just says "don't remove; has side effects". Normally gcc does that automatically
for something without outputs, but this one has.
Besides a CRx access does not actually clobber memory.
-Andi
More information about the Devel
mailing list