From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16995 invoked by alias); 16 Feb 2011 10:59:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 16987 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Feb 2011 10:59:34 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from wp154.webpack.hosteurope.de (HELO wp154.webpack.hosteurope.de) (80.237.132.161) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 10:59:27 +0000 Received: from p5dc31605.dip.t-dialin.net ([93.195.22.5] helo=[192.168.2.100]); authenticated by wp154.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpa id 1Ppf6S-0003B1-En; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:59:24 +0100 Message-ID: <4D5BAE09.7060808@andihellmund.com> Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:18:00 -0000 From: Andi Hellmund User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.11pre) Gecko/20100623 Spicebird/0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Drasko DRASKOVIC CC: kevin diggs , gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: need volatile for asm? References: <4D5B1310.5070406@andihellmund.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-02/txt/msg00231.txt.bz2 > Would this be portable check, guaranteeing that compilation on other > machine with other gcc version will not do opposite ? You are right, this is definitely NOT portable > And anyway, why not always putting it to volatile ? Once you started > embedding asm code, I guess you had a good reason for it to appear in > the output code... Good point. Andi