On Mon, 3 Jan 2005, Alan Cox wrote: > When you use the barrier functions the kernel provides either > explicitly, or implicitly in the spinlock functions, those barriers are > true CPU level barriers (rmb/wmb). volatile is "dont cache", the > barriers are -ordering-, and in almost all cases what you care about is > ordering as in the example compilation problem posted. > > I make the comments based on several experiences where we added volatile > and then eventually ended up fixing it properly. I certainly can't > guarantee I am right I'm just voicing and opinion.
All right. Given the weight of opinion and experience coming down on this matter, I will redo the patch using barriers instead of volatile. Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
