christos@astron.com wrote:

> >It generates differnent code from the previous.
> >With volatile the counter is allocated on memory (not register)
> >and it would cause longer DELAY(9).
> 
> I guess it is ok to leave it as you have it, but I generally don't like
> using assembly when I don't have to.

IMO, DELAY(9) should be written in asm if it depends on a number
of instructions in the function, like mips/mips_mcclock_loop.S.

I.e. we should have a right DELAY(9) implementation especially
for MIPS1. (MIPS3 could use its internal counter)
---
Izumi Tsutsui