Satyam Sharma wrote: > Coming back to the document, we do need to document / find > consensus on the "preferred" way to do similar business in the > kernel, and my opinion as far as that is concerned is to shun > volatile wherever possible (which includes the case originally > discussed above).
I too recommend that volatile-considered-harmful.txt is not watered down by an ever growing "but if" list. If anybody knows what he does, he still can program in a deviating way --- provided that he leaves a brief comment in the code, telling why it is possible and beneficial to use the volatile qualifier in this special case. -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-=== -=-= -==-- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
