Re: [avr-gcc-list] Avr-gcc Produces Incorrect Code with -Os

[Graham Davies]

David Brown wrote:
> ... you are ... protecting the code sequence, not the data itself - the 
> data is indirectly protected by always using
> protected code sequences to access it.

I think this is just a point-of-view thing.  I could be wrong, but I think 
the prevalent point of view is that it is the data that needs to be 
protected.  Any means to do that would be acceptable.  It seems strange to 
talk about protecting the code sequence.  Making sure that the code executes 
in sequence and without interruption is just a means to the primary end of 
protecting the data.

Graham.