On 03/29/11 04:14 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
Consider, as a counterexample, that there exist only two variables in the core X server that are volatile, and yet we do a very similar resize-the-array move all the time. Is this because X is broken, or is this because your understanding of volatile is faulty?
I understand the volatile behavior as defined by the C standard. I also work in an environment where different compilers and compile options can be used, which spurs a bit of paranoia. If this use of this qualifier in platform specific code is going to cause the community sleepless nights, I can remove it.
[1] - Unless, of course, di_walk_minor is handing that memory to something that runs concurrently with the pciaccess consumer, and may modify it asynchronously. If that's true, though, that's one hell of a broken API.
This is not the case. _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
