Subject: Re: bogus line in i386/isa/npx.c?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Mike Long <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/14/1995 15:41:58
>From: email@example.com (J.T. Conklin)
>Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 12:23:07 -0700 (PDT)
>> So my question is, is this a misstatement of the __asm line that 2.4.5
>> blissfully ignores? Is this a bug in 2.7.0?
>It's a bug in gcc. It's been there a long time, and has manifested
>itself on other ports too. I believe that gcc decides to allocate a
>register for the variable, and then crashes later when the constraints
>of the asm() don't match.
>I think there are several places in the tree where:
> (void) &foo;
>expressions are used to force variables to be stored in memory.
Why can't you just add 'volatile' to the variable declaration?
Mike Long <firstname.lastname@example.org> http://www.shore.net/~mikel
VLSI Design Engineer finger email@example.com for PGP public key
Analog Devices, CPD Division CCBF225E7D3F7ECB2C8F7ABB15D9BE7B
Norwood, MA 02062 USA assert(*this!=opinionof(Analog));