Comment 23 for bug 1738730

Revision history for this message
Thomas Preud'homme (thomas-preudhomme) wrote :

Hi Murat,

I've read the thread and I agree with the final conclusion from Richard Earnshaw: doing byte by byte is the safest option from GCC's perspective when doing a volatile access as you cannot guarantee that unaligned access do. I think the source code should be changed to explicitely mark the first field as being aligned, or to exclude the volatile field from being packed.

Best regards.