Ralf Baechle wrote: > On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 11:50:00PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > > > > My understanding is that with gcc-3.4 that __asm__ __volatile__ does not > > > protect against dead code removal. If the code is not dead __volatile__ > > > works as documented, but dead code removal still happens. > > > > The inline version isn't dead code, and gcc isn't allowed to reschedule > > code around a __asm__ __volatile__, so the patch should be ok. > > It's the gcc generated function epilogue which is the problem. There's > no reliable way to work around that ... ITYM prologue. It has to follow the ABI specification, so $fp is the only possibly problematic one, and that's excluded by -fomit-frame-pointers. Thiemo
