Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:06:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:06:19 -0400 Received: from router-100M.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.17]:20754 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:06:09 -0400 Subject: Re: [CHECKER] repetitive/contradictory comparison bugs for 2.4.7 To: linux-kernel@alex.org.uk Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 23:06:02 +0100 (BST) Cc: engler@csl.Stanford.EDU (Dawson Engler), alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox), nave@stanford.edu (Evan Parker), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mc@CS.Stanford.EDU In-Reply-To: <602725597.996180886@[169.254.62.211]> from "Alex Bligh - linux-kernel" at Jul 26, 2001 08:54:48 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL5] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing > How will this be guaranteed to help handle a race, when gcc is > likely either to have tmp_buf in a register (not declared > volatile), or perhaps even optimize out the second reference. The function call is a synchronization point, and the function it calls might change the value. I put the barriers into my tree to make this clear although I cant see some future super gcc globally optimising that one anyway Alan - 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/