On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:50:56AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Mmm. This is a clobber, so it's supposed to indicate what is written, > not what is read :) But I agree with the "move" rationale, let's be safe > (it doesn't really matter here, there's a memory compiler barrier at the > function call anyway).
My thinking was rather to let gcc know that memory is being read so that it wouldn't generate instructions that might change it in parallel, although I don't think it's possible considering the instructions actually used. -- Richard Braun
