Re: Review of patch that uses "volatile sig_atomic_t"

2023-07-31 Thread David Chisnall
Hi, This bit of the C spec is a bit of a mess. There was, I believe, a desire to return volatile to its original use and make any use of volatile other than MMIO discouraged. This broke too much legacy code and so now it’s a confusing state. The requirements for volatile are that the compiler

Review of patch that uses "volatile sig_atomic_t"

2023-07-31 Thread Rick Macklem
Hi, I just put D41265 up on phabricator. It is a trivial change to mountd.c that defines the variable set by got_sighup() (the SIGHUP handler) as static volatile sig_atomic_t instead of static int I did list a couple of reviewers, but if you are familiar with this C requirement, please tak