Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures

On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Segher Boessenkool wrote:

quoted

Note that "volatile"
is a type-qualifier, not a type itself, so a cast of the _object_ itself
to a qualified-type i.e. (volatile int) would not make the access itself
volatile-qualified.

There is no such thing as "volatile-qualified access" defined
anywhere; there only is the concept of a "volatile-qualified
*object*".

Sure, "volatile-qualified access" was not some standard term I used
there. Just something to mean "an access that would make the compiler
treat the object at that memory as if it were an object with a
volatile-qualified type".

Now the second wording *IS* technically correct, but come on, it's
24 words long whereas the original one was 3 -- and hopefully anybody
reading the shorter phrase *would* have known anyway what was meant,
without having to be pedantic about it :-)


Satyam