On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 16:32:23 -0400 Chris Snook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It seems like this would fall more into the case of the arch providing > > guarantees when using locked/atomic access rather than anything > > SMP-related, no?. > > But if you're not using SMP, the only way you get a race condition is if your > compiler is reordering instructions that have side effects which are > invisible > to the compiler. This can happen with MMIO registers, but it's not an issue > with an atomic_t we're declaring in real memory. > Under non-SMP, some compilers would reordering instructions as they think and C standard informally guarantees all operations on volatile data are executed in the sequence in which they appear in the source code, right? So no reordering happens with volatile, right? -- Jerry > -- Chris - 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/
