Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758062AbXEISqV (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 14:46:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756948AbXEISqO (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 14:46:14 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.45.13]:31111 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756932AbXEISqN (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 14:46:13 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:date:from:x-x-sender:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to: message-id:references:mime-version:content-type; b=wJGAL8ZjVPKFIOSNoY5QyVjXwkoyI3Xj1FnNBK0s7Sl3c/9UHDKRhyTkHK6+CfC7f ousSk7uV3HyzilC0XS7PQ== Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 11:41:27 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com To: Alan Cox cc: Randy Dunlap , Satyam Sharma , Andrew Morton , Paul Sokolovsky , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jeremy@goop.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: volatile considered evil In-Reply-To: <20070509143621.282f2400@the-village.bc.nu> Message-ID: References: <516386418.20070501080839@gmail.com> <20070430235642.e576e917.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070508121404.17bd97a6.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> <20070508163452.8b71f682.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> <20070508190800.1334b968.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> <20070509102134.5d722386@the-village.bc.nu> <20070509143621.282f2400@the-village.bc.nu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 774 Lines: 18 On Wed, 9 May 2007, Alan Cox wrote: > > Thus, any reliance on type-qualifying an object that represents an atomic > > or locking primitive on the keyword 'volatile' is misplaced. > > arch/foo is generally implementation specific code. > That's true, but what qualifies as an "access" to an object that is type qualified with the 'volatile' keyword is _implementation_ defined, meaning the behavior is defined by the compiler and not this new architecture you're proposing 'volatile' is appropriate for. That's pure C99. - 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/