Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 May 2007 22:41:40 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] "volatile considered harmful", take 3 |
| |
H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > I don't see why Alan's way is necessarily better; it should work but is > more heavy-handed as it's disabling *all* optimization such as loop > invariants across the barrier. >
To expand on this further: the way this probably *should* be handled, Linux-style, is with internally-volatile versions of le32_to_cpup() and friends. That obeys the concept that the volatility should be associated with an operation, not a data structure, and, being related to an I/O device, should have its endianness explicitly declared.
Right now those macros don't exist, however.
-hpa - 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/
| |