Re: [RFC/PATCH] doc: volatile considered evil

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



David Rientjes wrote:
On Tue, 8 May 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:

It's already there, isn't it?  <quote from original:>

The only acceptable uses for "volatile" are:

 - in _code_, i.e., for things like the definition of "readb()" etc, where we
   use it to force a particular access.
 - with inline asms
 - on "jiffies", for stupid legacy reasons

</quote>

or are you saying that you want to subject/header/title modified also?


I wasn't aware that you were considering the inclusion of Linus' entire email in the document. There exists a point where CodingStyle becomes so large that people choose not to read it in its entirety, so I was expecting only an addition that would explicit document the acceptable and unacceptable uses of 'volatile' in kernel code with perhaps a link to his email.

but I wouldn't put it into CodingStyle.

--
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
-
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]
  Powered by Linux