Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch] spinlocks: remove 'volatile' | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Date | Sat, 08 Jul 2006 11:52:23 +0200 |
| |
On Sat, 2006-07-08 at 05:45 -0400, Joe Korty wrote: > On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 11:54:10PM -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > That's all theoretical though. Today, gcc's volatile does > > not follow the C standard on modern hardware. Bummer. > > It'd be low-performance anyway though. > > But gcc would follow the standard if it emitted a 'lock' > insn on every volatile reference.
nope that's not nearly enough for pci MMIO space for example, nor for any of the weakly ordered architectures.
- 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/
| |