From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Holler Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 21:59:34 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH] ARM: Avoid compiler optimization for usages of readb, writeb and friends. In-Reply-To: <1292679093-4632-1-git-send-email-holler@ahsoftware.de> References: <1292679093-4632-1-git-send-email-holler@ahsoftware.de> Message-ID: <4D0D20B6.7020705@ahsoftware.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hello, Am -10.01.-28163 20:59, schrieb Alexander Holler: > gcc 4.5.1 seems to ignore (at least some) volatile definitions, > avoid that as done in the kernel. > --- > arch/arm/include/asm/io.h | 15 +++++++++------ > 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h > index ff1518e..3b6c1da 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/io.h > @@ -125,13 +125,16 @@ extern inline void __raw_readsl(unsigned int addr, void *data, int longlen) > #define __raw_readw(a) __arch_getw(a) > #define __raw_readl(a) __arch_getl(a) > > -#define writeb(v,a) __arch_putb(v,a) > -#define writew(v,a) __arch_putw(v,a) > -#define writel(v,a) __arch_putl(v,a) > +#define __iormb() do { } while (0) > +#define __iowmb() do { } while (0) > > -#define readb(a) __arch_getb(a) > -#define readw(a) __arch_getw(a) > -#define readl(a) __arch_getl(a) > +#define writeb(v,c) ({ __iowmb(); __arch_putb(v,c); }) > +#define writew(v,c) ({ __iowmb(); __arch_putw(v,c); }) > +#define writel(v,c) ({ __iowmb(); __arch_putl(v,c); }) > + > +#define readb(c) ({ u8 __v = __arch_getb(c); __iormb(); __v; }) > +#define readw(c) ({ u16 __v = __arch_getw(c); __iormb(); __v; }) > +#define readl(c) ({ u32 __v = __arch_getl(c); __iormb(); __v; }) > > /* > * The compiler seems to be incapable of optimising constants Sorry, but that patch doesn't work. My first version of that used __arch_putb and __arch_getb for all (instead of w and l), therefor the generated asm code looked (somewhat) correct and I've concluded wrongly that the compiler now doesn't do the wrong optimizations. But after I've changed that to use l and w, those (wrong) optimizations where back again and I haven't seen that. Sorry, will look for another solution. Regards, Alexander