From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753361Ab0EQPEx (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 May 2010 11:04:53 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:41245 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751878Ab0EQPEv (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 May 2010 11:04:51 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 08:01:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Anton Blanchard cc: 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 In-Reply-To: <20100517043457.GA22416@kryten> Message-ID: References: <20100517043353.GA22127@kryten> <20100517043457.GA22416@kryten> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 17 May 2010, Anton Blanchard wrote: > > It turns out this bad code is a result of us defining atomic_t as a > volatile int. Heh. Ok, as you point out in the commit message, I obviously agree with this patch. "volatile" on data is evil, with the possible exception of "jiffies" type things. So applied. Linus