[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
On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 11:54:54AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > So I don't see any good reason to make the atomic API more complex by
> > having "volatile" and "non-volatile" versions of atomic_read. It
> > should just have the "volatile" behaviour.
> If you want to make it less complex then drop volatile which causes weird
> side effects without solving any problems as you just pointed out.

The other set of problems are communication between process context
and interrupt/NMI handlers. Volatile does help here. And the performance
impact of volatile is pretty near zero, so why have the non-volatile

Thanx, Paul
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 22:11    [W:0.226 / U:1.360 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site