Linus Torvalds wrote:
It's not that "volatile" is the "portable way". It's that "volatile" is
fundamentally not sufficient for the job.
However it does seem to be good for some things, as you say.
The volatile casting in atomic_* and *_bit seems to be a good idea
(now that I think about it) [1].
Because if you had a barrier there, you'd have to reload everything
used after an atomic_read or set_bit, etc.
But it might be nice to wrap that in something rather than use
volatile directly. force_reload(wordptr); maybe?
[1] Even though I still can't tell the exact semantics of these
operations eg. why do we need volatile at all? why do we have
volatile in the double underscore (non-atomic) versions?
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
