[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130916072603.GA11007@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 10:26:03 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why does test_bit() take a volatile addr?
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 04:53:44PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rusty,
>
> On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 13:38:35 +0930 Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > Predates git, does anyone remember the rationale?
> >
> > ie:
> > int test_bit(int nr, const volatile unsigned long *addr)
>
> Because we sometimes pass volatile pointers to it and gcc will complain
> if you pass a volatile to a non volatile (I think).
Where are these? I did git grep -W test_bit and looked for volatile,
couldn't find anything.
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell sfr@...b.auug.org.au
--
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