On Friday 26 October 2007 01:14:41 Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >
> > > Marking volatile I think is out of the question. To start with,
> > > volatile creates really poor code (and most of the time we actually
> > > do want the code in critical sections to be as tight as possible).
> >
> > Poor code is better than broken code I would say.
>
> No. A *working*compiler* is better than broken code.
>
> There's no way to use volatile for these things, since it can hit
> *anything*.
No it can't (at least not on x86) as I have explained in the rest of the mail
you conveniently snipped.
-Andi
-
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]
