[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
>>>> Part of the motivation here is to fix heisenbugs.  If I knew where 
>>>> they
>>> By the same token we should probably disable optimisations
>>> altogether since that too can create heisenbugs.
>> Almost everything is a tradeoff; and so is this. I don't
>> believe most people would find disabling all compiler
>> optimisations an acceptable price to pay for some peace
>> of mind.
> So why is this a good tradeoff?

It certainly is better than disabling all compiler optimisations!

> I also think that just adding things to APIs in the hope it might fix
> up some bugs isn't really a good road to go down. Where do you stop?

I look at it the other way: keeping the "volatile" semantics in
atomic_XXX() (or adding them to it, whatever) helps _prevent_ bugs;
certainly most people expect that behaviour, and also that behaviour
is *needed* in some places and no other interface provides that

[some confusion about barriers wrt atomics snipped]


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-08-16 21:41    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans