Re: [avr-libc-dev] Re: bug #22163 (atomic not working as expectedinC++)

[Joerg Wunsch]

As Weddington, Eric wrote:

> As a side note, wouldn't declaring some_temp_variable as volatile
> solve the issue above?

I think it does, but it's another pessimization...  It forces the
function to get a stack frame even if it otherwise doesn't need it,
and adds memory access cycles.  The optimizer could perfectly keep the
variable in a register, it's just that the developer intended to move
the time-critical routine outside the interrupt block.

-- 
cheers, J"org               .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/                        NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)