Adrian Filipi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yeah, I agree it's bogus for the pointer to be volatile. There > shouldn't be anything unusual about that. > > The assembler does show several additional memory accesses, so I > think your theory is right. I'm at a loss for what to to on the sync().
I'm at a loss too, I'm afraid...I don't really know PXA. Linux seems to put an mb() after every write to the flash, so perhaps include/asm-arm/system.h on Linux can provide some hints? In any case, sync() should probably expand to at least a compiler barrier on all architectures...though I'm not sure if it will make a difference in this particular case. Haavard ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
