Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 23:00:03 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       akpm@linux-foundation.org, Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] "volatile considered harmful" document
Message-ID: <20070510230003.5861c4b9@the-village.bc.nu>
In-Reply-To: <46437416.4070401@zytor.com>
References: <25493.1178744744@lwn.net>
	<46437416.4070401@zytor.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 813
Lines: 21

> In Ethernet drivers, for example, it is common for the network card to
> maintain a pointer in host memory the the latest descriptor written; you
> will generally have a loop of the form:
> 
> 	while ((this_pointer = *pointer_ptr) > my_last_pointer) {
> 		for (pkt = my_last_pointer; pkt < this_pointer; pkt++)
> 			receeive_packet(pkt);
> 		my_last_pointer = this_pointer;
> 	}
> 
> pointer_p can then be a volatile pointer into said coherent memory.

True but you can happily use rmb/wmb for this which are clearer and fit
the rest of the Linux model better.

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/