On Friday 26 October 2007 01:14:41 Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > > Marking volatile I think is out of the question. To start with, > > > volatile creates really poor code (and most of the time we actually > > > do want the code in critical sections to be as tight as possible). > > > > Poor code is better than broken code I would say. > > No. A *working*compiler* is better than broken code. > > There's no way to use volatile for these things, since it can hit > *anything*.
No it can't (at least not on x86) as I have explained in the rest of the mail you conveniently snipped. -Andi - 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/
