On 27 Feb 2018, at 12:56, Ruslan Nikolaev via gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > And all this mess to accommodate almost non-existent case when someone wants > to use atomic_load on read-only memory for wide types, in which no good > solution exists anyway
Sorry to butt in, but - if it's ROM why would you need atomic load anyway? (of course, if it's just a constant view of the object, reason is obvious)
