Path: csiph.com!au2pb.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.panservice.it!diesel.cu.mi.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: linux.kernel
Subject: Re: no-op delay loops
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 10:10:03 +0100
Message-ID: <qzncv-Rf-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
References: <qzn2P-yf-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.0 \(3094\))
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: robomod@news.nic.it
Approved: robomod@news.nic.it
Lines: 34
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Xref: csiph.com linux.kernel:1278659


> On Nov 27, 2015, at 16:53, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> It seems that gcc happily compiles
> 
> for (i = 0; i < 1000000000; ++i) ;
> 
> into simply
> 
> i = 1000000000;
> 
> (which is then usually eliminated as a dead store). At least at -O2, and
> when i is not declared volatile. So it would seem that the loops at
> 
> arch/mips/pci/pci-rt2880.c:235
> arch/mips/pmcs-msp71xx/msp_setup.c:80
> arch/mips/sni/reset.c:35
> 
> actually don't do anything. (In the middle one, i is 'register', but
> that doesn't change anything.) Is mips compiled with some special flags
> that would make gcc actually emit code for the above?
> 
you can try to declare i as  volatile int i;
may gcc will not optimize it .

Thanks

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/