Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures

On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 19:02:54 +0100
Denys Vlasenko <[email protected]> wrote:

> Why is all this fixation on "volatile"? I don't think
> people want "volatile" keyword per se, they want atomic_read(&x) to
> _always_ compile into an memory-accessing instruction, not register
> access.

and ... why is that?
is there any valid, non-buggy code sequence that makes that a
reasonable requirement?
-
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 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
  - From: Denys Vlasenko <[email protected]>

References:
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
  - From: Paul Mackerras <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
  - From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
  - From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
  - From: Denys Vlasenko <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: [2.6 patch] powerpc: proper defconfig for crosscompiles
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Maple bus support for the Sega Dreamcast
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):
- 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]