http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56027



--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-01-18 12:08:52 
UTC ---

(In reply to comment #3)

> > I am mostly wondering what guarantees I have there won't be re-ordering. 
> > *mxcsr

> > are unspec_volatile and thus can commute with asm (register) but not asm

> > volatile or asm (memory in V1)? And function calls (fesetenv in V2) can't

> > commute with regular asm, volatile isn't required there?

> 

> You always need volatile here, even if in practice it seems that it is

> not required for a function call.  volatile tells it that the asm is

> a scheduling barrier for other volatile instructions.



Thanks, I'll do that.



> So - it works for you then and we can close this bug?



Give me a few hours, I'll close it this afternoon or tomorrow unless I come up

with a reason not to. I probably should have asked on gcc-help instead of

opening a PR.

Reply via email to