On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > GCC manual, section 6.1, "When
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > is a Volatile Object Accessed?" doesn't say anything of the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > kind.
^^^^^
> > True, "implementation-defined" as per the C standard _is_ supposed to mean
^^^^^
> > "unspecified behaviour where each implementation documents how the choice
> > is made". So ok, probably GCC isn't "documenting" this
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > implementation-defined behaviour which it is supposed to, but can't really
> > fault them much for this, probably.
>
> GCC _is_ documenting this, namely in this section 6.1.
(Again totally petty, but) Yes, but ...
> It doesn't
^^^^^^^^^^
> mention volatile-casted stuff. Draw your own conclusions.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
... exactly. So that's why I said "GCC isn't documenting _this_".
Man, try _reading_ mails before replying to them ...
-
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:
- [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Chris Snook <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Stefan Richter <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Bill Fink <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Segher Boessenkool <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Segher Boessenkool <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- Prev by Date: strange probe order issue after platform_add_devices()
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 002 of 6] Introduce rq_for_each_segment replacing rq_for_each_bio
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- Index(es):
 |