From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-85004-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 21971 invoked by alias); 1 Nov 2003 19:53:35 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 21961 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2003 19:53:35 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Nov 2003 19:53:35 -0000
Received: by nile.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 338)
	id 38EBAF29F2; Sat,  1 Nov 2003 14:53:35 -0500 (EST)
To: dalej@apple.com, dewar@gnat.com
Subject: Re: powerpc & unaligned block moves with fp registers
Cc: dj@redhat.com, dje@watson.ibm.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, mrs@apple.com
Message-Id: <20031101195335.38EBAF29F2@nile.gnat.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 19:53:00 -0000
From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00018.txt.bz2

> I would have to be shown that there is existing code that expects 
> volatile
> accesses to misaligned doubles to be atomic.

I would certaqinly agre that this expectation is highly dubious.