lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateSun, 1 Jul 2007 08:49:37 -0400 (EDT)
From"Robert P. J. Day" <>
Subjectwhy are some atomic_t's not volatile, while most are?
  prompted by the earlier post on "volatile"s, is there a reason that
most atomic_t typedefs use volatile int's, while the rest don't?

$ grep "typedef.*struct"  $(find . -name atomic.h)
./include/asm-v850/atomic.h:typedef struct { int counter; } atomic_t;
./include/asm-mips/atomic.h:typedef struct { volatile int counter; } atomic_t;
./include/asm-mips/atomic.h:typedef struct { volatile long counter; } atomic64_t;
...
  etc, etc.  just curious.

rday
-- 
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
========================================================================
-
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: 2007-07-01 14:53    [from the cache]
©2003-2008