Sam Ravnborg wrote:
quoted text
> While reviewing some CAN driver I stumbled on iounmap
> which has following prototype on x86:
> 
> extern void iounmap(volatile void __iomem *addr);
> 
> I argued that the driver should not use volatile
> but then I cannot explain why the argument to
> iounmap takes a volatile.
> 
> The same goes for many other functions in
> the io*.h headers.
> 
> Grepping the other archs they mostly follow
> same pattern.
> 
> Can anyone explain the rational for volatile in this case.
> 

Yes.  The use of volatile in a function prototype like this means that 
it is valid to pass a volatile pointer to that function -- in other 
words, we're telling gcc that we're not going to do anything with the 
pointer that is invalid for a volatile pointer.

A lot of the "volatile considered harmful" stuff that has been bandied 
about is explicitly about marking *data* items volatile (it does have 
its uses, but it's easy to get wrong); Linus has explicitly made the 
distinction between volatile *data* and volatile *operations*.

	-hpa
--
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/