From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ZEY1o-00023G-5E for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 07:19:52 +0000 Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 09:19:29 +0200 From: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Message-ID: <20150713071929.GV1426@pengutronix.de> References: <1436353060-22497-1-git-send-email-s.hauer@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1436353060-22497-1-git-send-email-s.hauer@pengutronix.de> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Build with -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks To: Sascha Hauer Cc: Barebox List On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 12:57:40PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote: > This becomes important with gcc-4.9. Without this gcc assumes > that accessing NULL pointers traps and everything that happens > behind the access is not executed. This recently happened with > i.MX53 which has: > = > static int imx53_silicon_revision(void) > { > void __iomem *rom =3D MX53_IROM_BASE_ADDR; I assume MX53_IROM_BASE_ADDR is 0? Is this worth to be pointed out in the commit log? Best regards Uwe -- = Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox