Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Aug 2007 20:12:48 +0530 (IST) | From | Satyam Sharma <> | Subject | Re: [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/
| |