You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
[LangRef] Comment on validity of volatile ops on null (#139803)
Some hardware (for example, certain AVR chips) have peripheral registers
mapped to the data space address 0. Although a volatile load/store on
`ptr null` already generates expected code, the wording in the LangRef
makes operations on null seem like undefined behavior in all cases. This
commit adds a comment that, for volatile operations, it may be defined
behavior to access the address null, if the architecture permits it. The
intended use case is MMIO registers with hard-coded addresses that
include bit-value 0. A simple CodeGen test is included for AVR, as an
architecture known to have this quirk, that does `load volatile` and
`store volatile` to `ptr null`, expecting to generate `lds <reg>, 0` and
`sts 0, <reg>`.
See [this
thread](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/213817-t-lang/topic/Adding.20the.20possibility.20of.20volatile.20access.20to.20address.200)
and [the
RFC](https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-volatile-access-to-non-dereferenceable-memory-may-be-well-defined/86303)
for discussion and context.
0 commit comments