Here is my code: ================================================================================= #include <pthread.h> #include <stdio.h> #define NUM_THREADS 1 static int flag = 0; void *thread(void *threadid) { int ret = rand(); printf("thread return %d!\n", ret); sleep(10); flag = 1; return (void *)ret; } int main (int argc, char *argv[]) { pthread_t threads[NUM_THREADS]; int rc; rc = pthread_create(&threads[0], NULL, thread, (void *)0); if (rc){ printf("ERROR; return code from pthread_create() is %d\n", rc); exit(-1); } while( flag == 0 ) ; return 0; } ================================================================================= gcc -O2 -g -lpthread a.c objdump -S a.out > a.S `cat a.S` shows: ================================================================================= if (rc){ 80484d4: 85 c0 test %eax,%eax 80484d6: 75 15 jne 80484ed <main+0x4d> 80484d8: a1 68 97 04 08 mov 0x8049768,%eax 80484dd: 85 c0 test %eax,%eax 80484df: 90 nop printf("ERROR; return code from pthread_create() is %d\n", rc); exit(-1); } while( flag == 0 ) ; 80484e0: 74 fe je 80484e0 <main+0x40> ================================================================================ You can see the variable `flag` is read only once. If the value of `flag` is 0 at the first time, the program will trap into a dead loop and never exit. And gcc knows the value of `flag` could be modified in the routine `thread`. But if I modify the line "while( flag == 0 ) ;" to "while(flag == 0) printf("waiting..\n");" and recompile the source code, the output assembly code becomes: ================================================================================= while( flag == 0 ) printf("waiting..\n"); 8048510: c7 04 24 74 86 04 08 movl $0x8048674,(%esp) 8048517: e8 90 fe ff ff call 80483ac <puts@plt> 804851c: a1 b8 97 04 08 mov 0x80497b8,%eax 8048521: 85 c0 test %eax,%eax 8048523: 74 eb je 8048510 <main+0x40> ================================================================================= `flag` is read in each loop. Then when the value of `flag` is modified, the loop terminates. I wonder why gcc generates code for a empty loop like that. Is it a bug or for optimization in some case? My gcc is: Using built-in specs. Target: i386-redhat-linux Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-checking=release --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-libunwind-exceptions --enable-libgcj-multifile --enable-languages=c,c++,objc,obj-c++,java,fortran,ada --enable-java-awt=gtk --disable-dssi --with-java-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-1.4.2.0/jre --with-cpu=generic --host=i386-redhat-linux Thread model: posix gcc version 4.1.1 20060525 (Red Hat 4.1.1-1)