Re: [PATCH] "volatile considered harmful", take 2

[H. Peter Anvin]

pradeep singh wrote:
> 
> Sorry, for my misunderstanding but i hope Jonathan actually means
> volatile harmful only in C and not while using extended asm with gcc? Or
> does you all consider volatile while using extended asm as harmful too?
> Incidentally i came to know that using volatile in such cases may be
> still be optimized by the gcc. And the correct way is to fake a side
> effect to the gcc, which can be done using "memory" clobbering directive
> in the correct place and not "m" or "+m".
> 
> Does this means to exclude volatile from extended asm also, while using
> them in kernel?
> 

We were talking about "register", not "volatile".

	-hpa
-
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/