Re: [patch] ipvs: force read of atomic_t in while loop

On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 03:21:31AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Heiko Carstens <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 11:33:00 +0200
> 
> > Just saw this while grepping for atomic_reads in a while loops.
> > Maybe we should re-add the volatile to atomic_t. Not sure.
> 
> I think whatever the choice, it should be done consistently
> on every architecture.
> 
> It's just asking for trouble if your arch does it differently from
> every other.

Well..currently it's i386/x86_64 and s390 which have no volatile
in atomic_t. And yes, of course I agree it should be consistent
across all architectures. But it isn't.
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [patch] ipvs: force read of atomic_t in while loop
    • From: Chris Snook <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [patch] ipvs: force read of atomic_t in while loop
    • From: Heiko Carstens <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch] ipvs: force read of atomic_t in while loop
    • From: David Miller <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [patch 2/2] x86_64: ticket lock spinlock
• Next by Date: Re: PATCH/RFC: [kdump] fix APIC shutdown sequence
• Previous by thread: Re: [patch] ipvs: force read of atomic_t in while loop
• Next by thread: Re: [patch] ipvs: force read of atomic_t in while loop
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]