Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 14:31:51 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
       Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>,
       Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@gmail.com>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Paul Sokolovsky <pmiscml@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       jeremy@goop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: volatile considered evil
Message-ID: <20070509143151.6f0731fe@the-village.bc.nu>
In-Reply-To: <464193DB.70205@yahoo.com.au>
References: <516386418.20070501080839@gmail.com>
	<20070430235642.e576e917.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<20070508121404.17bd97a6.randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
	<a781481a0705081307r546f8889qecca3db16ea03fb8@mail.gmail.com>
	<20070508163452.8b71f682.randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
	<alpine.DEB.0.99.0705081702070.28511@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
	<20070508190800.1334b968.randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
	<alpine.DEB.0.99.0705081934390.20751@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
	<20070509102134.5d722386@the-village.bc.nu>
	<464193DB.70205@yahoo.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 768
Lines: 16

> > When you are implementing the locking primitives on a new platform. When
> > you are implementing the I/O and atomic prmitives on a new platform. Also
> > in inline gcc assembler where "volatile" is used for subtly different
> > purposes.
> 
> Is there a good reason for using volatile in atomic/locking primitives?
> AFAIKS there is not.

Depends on the platform. If you are writing a new architecture then who
knows what you will need to get the barriers right - you may want to use
volatile, you may want to use asm.
-
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/