Re: [PATCH] "volatile considered harmful", take 3

[Jesper Juhl]

On 11/05/07, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Here's another version of the volatile document.  Once again, I've tried
> to address all of the comments.  There haven't really been any recent
> comments addressing the correctness of the document; people have been
> more concerned with how it's expressed.  I'm glad to see files in
> Documentation/ held to a high standard of writing, but, unless somebody
> has a factual issue this time around I would like to declare Mission
> Accomplished and move on.
>
> Thanks,
>
> jon
>
> ---
>
> Encourage developers to avoid the volatile type class in kernel code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>

Looks good to me.

Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@xxxxxxxxx>


--
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@xxxxxxxxx>
Don't top-post  http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please      http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/