Re: [avr-gcc-list] Re: optimizer removes volatile pin access code. why?

[Erik Christiansen]

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:44:48PM +0100, Joerg Desch wrote:
> I've talked to an colleague this morning. He had the same problems with
> WinAVR a few months ago. His solution was adding a asm volatile("nop")
> between cbi() and sbi(). He had to generate a bus timing by software.

When generating output pulses of only a few cpu cycles, I've always
preferred to do it in an asm file, linked in with the rest of the code.
That does cost a function call and return, but the timing cannot be
changed by gcc or command-line option vagaries. (In an embedded system,
protection against experiences like yours is why I don't like to leave
such critical things in the hands of compiler coders. YMMV, however.)

Erik

P.S. If this somehow doesn't make it to the list, could you please
     forward it?