Satyam Sharma wrote: > [ BTW, why do we want the compiler to not optimize atomic_read()'s in > the first place? Atomic ops guarantee atomicity, which has nothing > to do with "volatility" -- users that expect "volatility" from > atomic ops are the ones who must be fixed instead, IMHO. ]
LDD3 says on page 125: "The following operations are defined for the type [atomic_t] and are guaranteed to be atomic with respect to all processors of an SMP computer." Doesn't "atomic WRT all processors" require volatility? -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-=== =--- -==== http://arcgraph.de/sr/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
