[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <3694fb2e4ed1e4d9bf873c0d050c911e@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 03:26:02 +0200
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert.xu@...hat.com>
Cc: heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, horms@...ge.net.au,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rpjday@...dspring.com, ak@...e.de,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, cfriesen@...tel.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
jesper.juhl@...il.com, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, zlynx@....org,
satyam@...radead.org, clameter@....com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
wensong@...ux-vs.org, wjiang@...ilience.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
>> Part of the motivation here is to fix heisenbugs. If I knew where
>> they
>
> By the same token we should probably disable optimisations
> altogether since that too can create heisenbugs.
Almost everything is a tradeoff; and so is this. I don't
believe most people would find disabling all compiler
optimisations an acceptable price to pay for some peace
of mind.
Segher
-
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