Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:08:30 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures |
| |
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 11:33:36PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 07:25:16AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > Do we really need another set of APIs? Can you give even one example > > where the pre-existing volatile semantics are causing enough of a problem > > to justify adding yet more atomic_*() APIs? > > Let's turn this around. Can you give a single example where > the volatile semantics is needed in a legitimate way?
Sorry, but you are the one advocating for the change.
Nice try, though! ;-)
Thanx, Paul - 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/
| |