On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > The fact is, "volatile" *only* makes things worse. It generates worse > code, and never fixes any real bugs. This is a *fact*. Yes, lets just drop the volatiles now! We need a patch that gets rid of them.... Volunteers? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@googlemail.com>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@googlemail.com>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- Next by Date: Re: 2.6.23-rc4-mm1
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
- Next by thread: [PATCH] Document non-semantics of atomic_read() and atomic_set()
- Index(es):
 |