Gaurav-Aggarwal-AWS

I am closing this PR. Please open a new one when you have tested the changes.

Reached out to Raspbery Pi to confirm that they are okay with the change.

Source code: ``` void fun( void ) { volatile int i = 0; portDISABLE_INTERRUPTS(); i++; i++; portENABLE_INTERRUPTS(); } ``` Generated assembly when using IAR intrinsics - ``` fun: SUBA #0x2,...

> portDisableInterrupts() is not an IAR intrinsic... It's defined by FreeRTOS as an asm directive. Unless there is more to these examples than you shared, these only prove that IAR...

> It is unclear to me what the even potential concurrency hazard is by having an instruction executed before an EINT... I am not sure about that but I guess...

Source code - ``` void fun( void ) { __enable_interrupt(); } ``` Generated assembly: ``` fun: /* __enable_interrupt(); */ NOP

@mayl Do you need anything else or should I close this PR?

Thank you for your response. I will keep it open then.

One of my colleague pointed to the section 8.2 in this doc which seems relevant - https://www.ti.com/lit/ug/slau646f/slau646f.pdf?ts=1724857570924&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F.

@mayl Have you made any progress? Do you want me to keep the PR open still?