On Friday 26 October 2007 01:14:41 Linus Torvalds wrote:
quoted text
> 
> 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
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/