![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 11:54:10PM -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote: > That's all theoretical though. Today, gcc's volatile does > not follow the C standard on modern hardware. Bummer. > It'd be low-performance anyway though. But gcc would follow the standard if it emitted a 'lock' insn on every volatile reference. It should at least have an option to do that. Joe - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-07-08 11:51 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||