lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures


On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Segher Boessenkool wrote:

> > > GCC manual, section 6.1, "When
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > is a Volatile Object Accessed?" doesn't say anything of the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > kind.
^^^^^

> > True, "implementation-defined" as per the C standard _is_ supposed to mean
^^^^^

> > "unspecified behaviour where each implementation documents how the choice
> > is made". So ok, probably GCC isn't "documenting" this
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> > implementation-defined behaviour which it is supposed to, but can't really
> > fault them much for this, probably.
>
> GCC _is_ documenting this, namely in this section 6.1.

(Again totally petty, but) Yes, but ...

> It doesn't
^^^^^^^^^^
> mention volatile-casted stuff. Draw your own conclusions.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

... exactly. So that's why I said "GCC isn't documenting _this_".

Man, try _reading_ mails before replying to them ...
-
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: 2007-08-18 16:59    [W:0.964 / U:0.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site