lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] doc: volatile considered evil
    On Tue, 8 May 2007 19:38:56 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes wrote:

    > On Tue, 8 May 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
    >
    > > "volatile" used on a gcc asm extension is different, granted.
    > > It's not even a C-language "volatile" keyword AFAICT, so it doesn't
    > > apply in this context.
    > >
    >
    > Using 'volatile' for an asm construct certainly is a keyword; in fact, C99
    > defines 'volatile' as a token which is reserved for use as a keyword.

    touche'

    > > Anyway, how is this slightly modified title?
    > >
    > > +***** "volatile" considered useless and evil: Just Say NO! *****
    > > +
    > > +Do not use the C-language "volatile" keyword on kernel data
    > > +(extracted from lkml emails from Linus)
    > >
    >
    > It's still ambiguous. A much more explicit title that nobody could argue
    > with would be "do not use the 'volatile' keyword as a type qualifier for
    > an object."

    OK, I can accept that.

    ---
    ~Randy
    *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
    -
    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: 2007-05-09 05:17    [W:0.022 / U:62.640 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site