[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070822005007.GG7574@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 17:50:07 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Cc: Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, horms@...ge.net.au,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ak@...e.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
cfriesen@...tel.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
rpjday@...dspring.com, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, jesper.juhl@...il.com,
satyam@...radead.org, zlynx@....org, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, davem@...emloft.net,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
wensong@...ux-vs.org, wjiang@...ilience.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 06:51:16PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:16:43 PDT, "Paul E. McKenney" said:
>
> > I agree that instant gratification is hard to come by when synching
> > up compiler and kernel versions. Nonetheless, it should be possible
> > to create APIs that are are conditioned on the compiler version.
>
> We've tried that, sort of. See the mess surrounding the whole
> extern/static/inline/__whatever boondogle, which seems to have
> changed semantics in every single gcc release since 2.95 or so.
>
> And recently mention was made that gcc4.4 will have *new* semantics
> in this area. Yee. Hah.
;-)
Thanx, Paul
-
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