lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:33:40 +0200 From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org> To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.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>, Herbert Xu <herbert.xu@...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 >> The only thing volatile on an asm does is create a side effect >> on the asm statement; in effect, it tells the compiler "do not >> remove this asm even if you don't need any of its outputs". >> >> It's not disabling optimisation likely to result in bugs, >> heisen- or otherwise; _not_ putting the volatile on an asm >> that needs it simply _is_ a bug :-) > > Yep. And the reason it is a bug is that it fails to disable > the relevant compiler optimizations. So I suspect that we might > actually be saying the same thing here. We're not saying the same thing, but we do agree :-) Segher - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists