[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4640E62D.8060704@goop.org>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 14:05:49 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
CC: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Sokolovsky <pmiscml@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] doc: volatile considered evil
Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
> David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> writes:
>
>
>> Since 'volatile' has two different semantics depending on the context in
>> which it is used, this warning should be appended to include the fact that
>> it is legitimate to use for inline assembly.
>>
>
> I think it hasn't two semantics, it's like arguing that char has two
> semantics.
>
No, David means that "asm volatile (...)" is meaningful and OK to use.
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists