Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 149005
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 11, 20262026-05-11T09:03:33+00:00 2026-05-11T09:03:33+00:00

Consider the following: volatile uint32_t i; How do I know if gcc did or

  • 0

Consider the following:

volatile uint32_t i; 

How do I know if gcc did or did not treat i as volatile? It would be declared as such because no nearby code is going to modify it, and modification of it is likely due to some interrupt.

I am not the world’s worst assembly programmer, but I play one on TV. Can someone help me to understand how it would differ?

If you take the following stupid code:

#include <stdio.h> #include <inttypes.h>  volatile uint32_t i;  int main(void) {         if (i == 64738)                 return 0;         else                 return 1; } 

Compile it to object format and disassemble it via objdump, then do the same after removing ‘volatile’, there is no difference (according to diff). Is the volatile declaration just too close to where its checked or modified or should I just always use some atomic type when declaring something volatile? Do some optimization flags influence this?

Note, my stupid sample does not fully match my question, I realize this. I’m only trying to find out if gcc did or did not treat the variable as volatile, so I’m studying small dumps to try to find the difference.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 1 View
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. 2026-05-11T09:03:34+00:00Added an answer on May 11, 2026 at 9:03 am

    Many compilers in some situations don’t treat volatile the way they should. See this paper if you deal much with volatiles to avoid nasty surprises: Volatiles are Miscompiled, and What to Do about It. It also contains the pretty good description of the volatile backed with the quotations from the standard.

    To be 100% sure, and for such a simple example check out the assembly output.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Consider the following Java code: volatile boolean v1 = false; volatile boolean v2 =
Consider the following code: int main() { int i; volatile int* p = &i;
Consider the following code: #include <stdio.h> void main() { uint32_t num = 2; __asm__
Consider the following condensed code: /* Compile: gcc -pthread -m32 -ansi x.c */ #include
Consider following code: My problem is: 1) I can't seem to cast the errors
Please consider following schema CREATE table articles ( id Int UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
Consider the following code, which takes place in a background thread (thread B): List<T>
Consider the following code: #include <stdlib.h> #ifndef TRY #define TRY struct #endif TRY testme
Consider following code: @interface TestClass () @property NSString *privateProperty; @end Now, as I learned,
Consider following JavaScript code (tested in Firefox): function f(a) { if (a == undefined)

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.