Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Rework READ_ONCE() to improve codegen

[Linus Torvalds]

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:47 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Isn't the read_barrier_depends() the only reason for actually needing
> the temporary local variable that must not be volatile?
>
> If you make alpha provide its own READ_ONCE() as the first
> step, it would seem that the rest of the series gets much easier
> as the others can go back to the simple statement from your

Hmm.. The union still would cause that "take the address of a volatile
thing on the stack" problem, wouldn't it? And that was what caused
most of the issues.

I think the _real_ issue is how KASAN forces that odd pair of inline
functions in order to have the annotations on the accesses.

                Linus