On Thu, 12 Nov 2015, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > This can't possibly be correct, the warnings are legitimate and the result > > of the sigsetjmp() in the function. You may be interested in > > returns_twice rather than marking random automatic variables as volatile. > > Hm, ok. I saw no probs with `int first' and `end' being volatile >
This will only happen with the undocumented change in your first patch which adds -O2. I don't know what version of gcc you're using, but only "first" and "end" being marked volatile isn't sufficient since mere code inspection would show that "off" will also be clobbered -- it's part of the loop. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
