Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 May 2007 23:25:18 +0200 | From | "Jesper Juhl" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] "volatile considered harmful", take 3 |
| |
On 11/05/07, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote: > Here's another version of the volatile document. Once again, I've tried > to address all of the comments. There haven't really been any recent > comments addressing the correctness of the document; people have been > more concerned with how it's expressed. I'm glad to see files in > Documentation/ held to a high standard of writing, but, unless somebody > has a factual issue this time around I would like to declare Mission > Accomplished and move on. > > Thanks, > > jon > > --- > > Encourage developers to avoid the volatile type class in kernel code. > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> >
Looks good to me.
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
-- Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - 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/
| |