From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jan 31 03:53:13 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C5AC16A4CE
	for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>;
	Mon, 31 Jan 2005 03:53:13 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from VARK.MIT.EDU (VARK.MIT.EDU [18.95.3.179])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B770743D3F
	for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>;
	Mon, 31 Jan 2005 03:53:12 +0000 (GMT)	(envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from VARK.MIT.EDU (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by VARK.MIT.EDU (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j0V3rNlJ008179;
	Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:53:23 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: (from das@localhost)
	by VARK.MIT.EDU (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id j0V3rM8R008178;
	Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:53:22 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG)
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:53:22 -0500
From: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG>
To: "Dag-Erling =?us-ascii:iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=" <des@des.no>
Message-ID: <20050131035322.GA8082@VARK.MIT.EDU>
Mail-Followup-To: "Dag-Erling =?us-ascii:iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?="
	<des@des.no>,
	Jacques Fourie <jf@trispen.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
References: <41F90140.3020705@trispen.com>
	<20050127160914.GA72454@VARK.MIT.EDU> <xzpsm4l281b.fsf@dwp.des.no>
	<xzppszpzrbr.fsf@dwp.des.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii:iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <xzppszpzrbr.fsf@dwp.des.no>
cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: kernel vm question
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 03:53:13 -0000

On Fri, Jan 28, 2005, Dag-Erling Smrgrav wrote:
> des@des.no (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) writes:
> > David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> writes:
> > > When the line is there, the compiler is probably smart enough to
> > > realize that 'x=y; y=x' is (usually) a no-op, so it optimizes away
> > > both statements.
> > Wrong.  The compiler is free to optimize away the second statement
> > provided that neither x nor y is declared volatile, but it cannot
> > optimize away the first statement.
> 
> I should add: unless it can determine with absolute certainty that x
> is not referenced later.

Exactly.  Notice that this is indeed the case for Jaques' example.
I oversimplified a bit because, as I mentioned, this is a
digression from the main point about writing to the code segment.
There's no need to be curt.