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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <>
To:	Segher Boessenkool <>
cc:	Paul Mackerras <>,,, Stefan Richter <>,
	Satyam Sharma <>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
	David Miller <>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <>,
	Ilpo Järvinen <>,,,,
	Netdev <>,,,
	Andrew Morton <>,,, Chris Snook <>,
	Herbert Xu <>,
	Linus Torvalds <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all

On Fri, 17 Aug 2007, Segher Boessenkool wrote:

> "volatile" has nothing to do with reordering.  atomic_dec() writes
> to memory, so it _does_ have "volatile semantics", implicitly, as
> long as the compiler cannot optimise the atomic variable away
> completely -- any store counts as a side effect.

Stores can be reordered. Only x86 has (mostly) implicit write ordering. So 
no atomic_dec has no volatile semantics and may be reordered on a variety 
of processors. Writes to memory may not follow code order on several 

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists