Re: arcbios_calls.S data hazards

On Mon, 8 Dec 2025, Steve Rumble wrote:

> Thanks a lot for the detailed response!

 I'm glad to be of help.

> Also, since we're invoking via gcc (-x assembler-with-cpp) and aren't
> specifying an optimisation level, it looks like gcc passes its -O0
> default into as, overriding as' -O2 default. If I pass -O2 to either
> gcc or into as specifically (via -Wa), as does appear to fill other
> delay slots where it can. I imagine we're producing suboptimal output
> where reordering is currently being used.

 Perhaps it's worth considering then?

  Maciej