On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >
> > You need to exclude "asm volatile", which is a completely different thing.
>
> 10077.
Yeah, way too many.
That said, at least _some_ of them are:
- casts to volatile inside arch-specific code serquences (ie the _good_
kind of volatile - associated with _code_ rather than data).
See for example include/asm-i386/io.h for 100% valid examples of this
kind of usage.
- function argument values for functions that need to be able to take an
arbitrary pointer ("const volatile void *" is the most permissive
argument type - anything else the compiler can complain about you
dropping qualifiers)
See include/asm-i386/bitops.h for examples of this kind of volatile.
So I'd expect that maybe one percent of them are actually valid ;)
And I suspect that a huge majority of the truly crapola ones are in
drivers. Oh, well..
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Re: [patch] uninline init_waitqueue_*() functions
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] uninline init_waitqueue_*() functions
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] uninline init_waitqueue_*() functions
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] uninline init_waitqueue_*() functions
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] uninline init_waitqueue_*() functions
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] uninline init_waitqueue_*() functions
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] uninline init_waitqueue_*() functions
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] uninline init_waitqueue_*() functions
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] uninline init_waitqueue_*() functions
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] uninline init_waitqueue_*() functions
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- From: "linux-os \(Dick Johnson\)" <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] uninline init_waitqueue_*() functions
- Prev by Date: Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- Next by Date: RE: [PATCH] mm: moving dirty pages balancing to pdfludh entirely
- Previous by thread: Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- Next by thread: Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- Index(es):
 |