On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 09:57, Jason Thorpe <thor...@me.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 6, 2019, at 5:41 AM, Kamil Rytarowski <n...@gmx.com> wrote: > > > > On 06.11.2019 14:37, Jason Thorpe wrote: > >> > >> > >>> On Nov 6, 2019, at 4:45 AM, Kamil Rytarowski <n...@gmx.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> I propose __write_relaxed() / __read_relaxed(). > >> > >> ...except that seems to imply the opposite of what these do. > >> > >> -- thorpej > >> > > > > Rationale? > > > > This matches atomic_load_relaxed() / atomic_write_relaxed(), but we do > > not deal with atomics here. > > Fair enough. To me, the names suggest "compiler is allowed to apply relaxed > constraints and tear the access if it wants".... But apparently the common > meaning is "relax, bro, I know what I'm doing". If that's the case, I can > roll with it.
Honestly, without reading any code, I interpretation is more inline with the former: hey relax, maybe it happens, maybe it doesn't but well, nothing matters so what ever
