On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 03:21:31AM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Heiko Carstens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 11:33:00 +0200 > > > Just saw this while grepping for atomic_reads in a while loops. > > Maybe we should re-add the volatile to atomic_t. Not sure. > > I think whatever the choice, it should be done consistently > on every architecture. > > It's just asking for trouble if your arch does it differently from > every other.
Well..currently it's i386/x86_64 and s390 which have no volatile in atomic_t. And yes, of course I agree it should be consistent across all architectures. But it isn't. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
