From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757669AbXGAMvR (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Jul 2007 08:51:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756329AbXGAMvJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Jul 2007 08:51:09 -0400 Received: from nic.NetDirect.CA ([216.16.235.2]:33582 "EHLO rubicon.netdirect.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756225AbXGAMvI (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Jul 2007 08:51:08 -0400 X-Originating-Ip: 72.143.66.27 Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 08:49:37 -0400 (EDT) From: "Robert P. J. Day" X-X-Sender: rpjday@localhost.localdomain To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: why are some atomic_t's not volatile, while most are? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Net-Direct-Inc-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-Net-Direct-Inc-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Net-Direct-Inc-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-16.8, required 5, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.80, BAYES_00 -15.00, INIT_RECVD_OUR_AUTH -20.00, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL 20.00) X-Net-Direct-Inc-MailScanner-From: rpjday@mindspring.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org prompted by the earlier post on "volatile"s, is there a reason that most atomic_t typedefs use volatile int's, while the rest don't? $ grep "typedef.*struct" $(find . -name atomic.h) ./include/asm-v850/atomic.h:typedef struct { int counter; } atomic_t; ./include/asm-mips/atomic.h:typedef struct { volatile int counter; } atomic_t; ./include/asm-mips/atomic.h:typedef struct { volatile long counter; } atomic64_t; ... etc, etc. just curious. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page ========================================================================