Re: [avr-libc-dev] [bug #14616] definition of sei() in interrupts.h is faulty

[Björn Haase]

Dmitry K. wrote on Dienstag, 27. September 2005 05:03 :
> On Tuesday 27 September 2005 01:54, Björn wrote:
> > Follow-up Comment #5, bug #14616 (project avr-libc):
> >
> > The unfortunate thing is, that using volatile is not enough. Even if it
> > works for your extremely simple test case: I am having a more complex
> > test case example in my application code, where it does *not* work
> > because gcc reorders the statements.
>
> [...]
>
> I am discouraged.
> I have try the next example with 3 compilers:
>       3.3.5, 3.4.4 and 4.0.0
> with 2 optimization levels:
>       -Os, -O3
> All 6 results are fine:  write to volatile is not reordered.

I'll try to strip the test case that I have at work so that it is no longer 
confidential property of my employer.

Bjoern.