From: Duncan Sands <baldrick@free.fr>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: Writable module parameters - should be volatile?
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 21:02:57 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <200409121357.25915.baldrick@free.fr> <1095098065.25641.38.camel@bach>
In-Reply-To: <1095098065.25641.38.camel@bach>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200409162102.57221.baldrick@free.fr>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 797
Lines: 25

Hi Rusty,

> > Shouldn't I declare num_rcv_urbs volatile?  Otherwise compiler
> > optimizations could (for example) stick it in a register and miss
> > any changes made by someone writing to it...
> 
> Sure.

except for the compiler warnings...

> If it really matters, you're going to need something stronger 
> than that, eg module_param_call().  For debugging, it's not usually a
> problem.  For more complex parameters, you usually need locks anyway.

Ah ha! - you can supply your own "set" and "get" methods.  Yes, that solves it.

Ciao,

Duncan.

-
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/