[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46437416.4070401@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 12:35:50 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] "volatile considered harmful" document
Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> OK, here's an updated version of the volatile document - as a plain text
> file this time. It drops a new file in Documentation/, but might it be
> better as an addition to CodingStyle?
>
> Comments welcome,
I have found one use of volatile which I consider legitimate: pointers
to data structures read or written by I/O devices in coherent memory
(typically pci_coherent memory.) This is local to device drivers, but
as far as I can tell, the use of volatile here is legitimate, although
arguably it will be redundant in > 90% of all cases due to the
incidental presence of other memory barriers.
In Ethernet drivers, for example, it is common for the network card to
maintain a pointer in host memory the the latest descriptor written; you
will generally have a loop of the form:
while ((this_pointer = *pointer_ptr) > my_last_pointer) {
for (pkt = my_last_pointer; pkt < this_pointer; pkt++)
receeive_packet(pkt);
my_last_pointer = this_pointer;
}
pointer_p can then be a volatile pointer into said coherent memory.
-hpa
-
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