On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, Linus Torvalds wrote: > So I don't technically disagree with anything you say,
That's good to know! > I just wanted > to point out that as far as the kernel is concerned, we do have higher > quality expectations from the compiler than just "technically valid > according to the C standard". Which suggests asking whether these higher expectations should be reflected in the Linux Kernel Memory Model. So far we have largely avoided doing that sort of thing, although there are a few exceptions. (For example, we assume the compiler does not destroy address dependencies from volatile reads -- but we also warn that this assumption may fail if the programmer does not follow some rules described in one of Paul's documentation files.) Alan
