Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
From: Satyam Sharma <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-18 14:30:42
Also in:
lkml, netdev
From: Satyam Sharma <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-18 14:30:42
Also in:
lkml, netdev
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
quoted
quoted
GCC manual, section 6.1, "When
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
quoted
quoted
is a Volatile Object Accessed?" doesn't say anything of the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
quoted
quoted
kind.
^^^^^
quoted
True, "implementation-defined" as per the C standard _is_ supposed to mean
^^^^^
quoted
"unspecified behaviour where each implementation documents how the choice is made". So ok, probably GCC isn't "documenting" this
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
quoted
implementation-defined behaviour which it is supposed to, but can't really fault them much for this, probably.GCC _is_ documenting this, namely in this section 6.1.
(Again totally petty, but) Yes, but ...
It doesn't
^^^^^^^^^^
mention volatile-casted stuff. Draw your own conclusions.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ... exactly. So that's why I said "GCC isn't documenting _this_". Man, try _reading_ mails before replying to them ...