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/
[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]
