[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <551455DC.4080604@de.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 19:54:20 +0100
From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the access_once tree
Am 26.03.2015 um 18:52 schrieb Linus Torvalds:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Christian Borntraeger
> <borntraeger@...ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Oh I just added that check back then because some guy named
>> Linus suggested something like that ;-)
>
> Yes, my bad.
>
> In my defense, that was when we were talking about ACCESS_ONCE()
> causing bugs with gcc due to the blind use of "volatile" that it turns
> out gcc doesn't necessarily like.
>
> With the memcpy fallback (and the simpler "scalar pointer copy by
> hand"), I think READ_ONCE() (and WRITE_ONCE()) are safe.
>
> Linus
>
FWIW, I dropped the warning fixp patch from my linux-next branch so
everything should be back to normal and we can merge Peters patch for 4.0 or
4.1.
Christian
--
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