On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 12:43:49PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > Is this not pretty much equivalent to a volatile read where you're forcing > > > the compiler to not optimise this unused thing away? In guard-regions I > > > set: > > > > > > #define FORCE_READ(x) (*(volatile typeof(x) *)x) > > > > > > For this purpose, which would make this: > > > > > > FORCE_READ(addr); > > > FORCE_READ(&addr[pagesize]); > > > > Hmmm, a compiler might be allowed to optimize out a volatile read. > > Looking into this, the compiler should not be allowed to do that. So > FORCE_READ() should work!
Yeah, was going to say I thought the compiler was explicitly forbidden from doing this so is a rare case of 'volatile considered harmful' not being quite so harmful :P > > -- > Cheers, > > David / dhildenb >
