On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 09:53:53PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > But I don't see how the volatile or pipe solutions are any better > though: it would seem that both result in undefined behaviour > according to my vfork man page. What undefined behavior does the pipe solution result in, considering it doesn't use vfork? Jeff - 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] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- From: Avi Kivity <[email protected]>
- RE: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- From: "David Schwartz" <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- From: Theodore Tso <[email protected]>
- [OT] 'volatile' in userspace
- From: Rutger Nijlunsing <[email protected]>
- Re: [OT] 'volatile' in userspace
- From: Theodore Tso <[email protected]>
- Re: [OT] 'volatile' in userspace
- From: "Joshua Hudson" <[email protected]>
- Re: [OT] 'volatile' in userspace
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [OT] 'volatile' in userspace
- From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
- Re: [OT] 'volatile' in userspace
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Add memcpy_cachebypass, a copy routine that tries to keep cache pressure down
- Next by Date: Re: [klibc] klibc and what's the next step?
- Previous by thread: Re: [OT] 'volatile' in userspace
- Next by thread: Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile'
- Index(es):
 |