From: Alexander Holler <holler@ahsoftware.de>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends.
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2011 19:47:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D1F76D7.8060603@ahsoftware.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D1F7197.6010607@googlemail.com>
Am 01.01.2011 19:25, schrieb Dirk Behme:
> On 01.01.2011 18:52, Alexander Holler wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Am 01.01.2011 13:04, schrieb Dirk Behme:
>>> On 22.12.2010 12:04, Alexander Holler wrote:
>>>> gcc 4.5.1 seems to ignore (at least some) volatile definitions,
>>>> avoid that as done in the kernel.
>>>>
>>>> Reading C99 6.7.3 8 and the comment 114) there, I think it is a bug of
>>>> that
>>>> gcc version to ignore the volatile type qualifier used e.g. in
>>>> __arch_getl().
>>>> Anyway, using a definition as in the kernel headers avoids such
>>>> optimizations when
>>>> gcc 4.5.1 is used.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe the headers as used in the current linux-kernel should be used,
>>>> but to avoid large changes, I've just added a small change to the
>>>> current headers.
>>
>>> Do you like to test the patch in the attachment? I named it 'v4'.
>>>
>>> After some thinking and testing, it seems to me that the volatile
>>> optimization issue this patch shall fix is only with the readx()
>>> macros.
>>> So the idea is to drop all writex() changes done in the v3 version of
>>> this patch. With dropping the writex() changes, we would drop all
>>> issues
>>> we discussed with e.g. the GCC statement-expression and the do while
>>> workaround, too.
>>
>> I've come across a bug which reads as the problem might be fixed in
>> gcc 4.5.2:
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45052
>>
>> I will test gcc 4.5.2 in the next days.
>
> Have you been able to test v4 of the patch I sent with gcc 4.5.1?
No, sorry, I don't have a test case for consequent write* and I will
have to write one. I will do such, when testing gcc 4.5.2 (sometimes in
the next days).
Regards,
Alexander
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-01 18:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-22 11:04 [U-Boot] [PATCH v3] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends Alexander Holler
2010-12-22 14:50 ` Dirk Behme
2010-12-22 15:07 ` Alexander Holler
2011-01-01 12:04 ` Dirk Behme
2011-01-01 17:52 ` Alexander Holler
2011-01-01 18:25 ` Dirk Behme
2011-01-01 18:47 ` Alexander Holler [this message]
2011-01-01 19:21 ` Dirk Behme
2011-01-02 12:43 ` Alexander Holler
2011-01-02 13:29 ` Dirk Behme
2011-01-02 21:00 ` Alexander Holler
2011-01-10 14:53 ` Alexander Holler
2011-01-10 15:05 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-11 3:53 ` Alexander Holler
2011-01-09 22:25 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-10 16:13 ` Dirk Behme
2011-01-17 21:59 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-09 22:19 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v4] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for " Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-12 15:17 ` Thomas Weber
2011-01-12 15:39 ` Alexander Holler
2011-01-12 16:40 ` Wolfgang Denk
2011-01-12 16:49 ` Alexander Holler
2011-01-15 13:13 ` Albert ARIBAUD
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4D1F76D7.8060603@ahsoftware.de \
--to=holler@ahsoftware.de \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.