linux-arch.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: npiggin@suse.de
Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
	anton@samba.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	willy@linux.intel.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
	paulus@samba.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]: atomic_t: Remove volatile from atomic_t definition
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 22:54:54 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100520.225454.37197037.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100521052746.GL2516@laptop>

From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 15:27:46 +1000

> Hmm, I'm missing something. David, back up a second, as far as I can see,
> with Anton's patches, atomic_read() *is* effectively just ACCESS_ONCE()
> now. Linus pointed out that header tangle is the reason not to just use
> the macro.

My bad, I was under the impression that the proposal was to remove
volatile usage and also not even do ACCESS_ONCE() in atomic_read().

And then explicitly annotate call sits that actually need the
ACCESS_ONCE() semantic.

  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-21  5:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-17  4:33 [PATCH 1/2]: atomic_t: Cast to volatile when accessing atomic variables Anton Blanchard
2010-05-17  4:34 ` [PATCH 2/2]: atomic_t: Remove volatile from atomic_t definition Anton Blanchard
2010-05-17  8:58   ` Heiko Carstens
2010-05-17 15:01   ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-17 20:13     ` Jamie Lokier
2010-05-17 20:20       ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-19 13:03     ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-19 14:55       ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-19 15:01       ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-05-19 19:54         ` David Miller
2010-05-19 22:50           ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-05-21  5:27             ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-21  5:54               ` David Miller [this message]
2010-05-21  6:06                 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-21  6:10                   ` David Miller
2010-05-21  6:44                     ` Eric Dumazet

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100520.225454.37197037.davem@davemloft.net \
    --to=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anton@samba.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=willy@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).