[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-libc-dev] Should cli() imply a memory barrier?

From: Paulo Marques
Subject: Re: [avr-libc-dev] Should cli() imply a memory barrier?
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 20:43:53 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20090817)

Joerg Wunsch wrote:
> As Paulo Marques wrote:
>> One thing we could do for the programmers that want to use the "raw"
>> cli version and know what they are doing is to keep a "__cli" or
>> "__raw_cli" version (or some other name) that just emits a single
>> "cli" instruction.
> I guess it's simple enough then to just write
> asm volatile("cli");

The same argument would hold for "nop", no?

And the counter argument is probably the same: the C code looks better
without "asm volatile" in the middle ;)

Anyway, I don't have strong feelings either way, so it's really your
call if it's worth it or not...

Paulo Marques
Software Development Department - Grupo PIE, S.A.
Phone: +351 252 290600, Fax: +351 252 290601
Web: www.grupopie.com

I have not yet begun to procrastinate

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]