On Mon, 17 May 2010, Anton Blanchard wrote: > > It turns out this bad code is a result of us defining atomic_t as a > volatile int. Heh. Ok, as you point out in the commit message, I obviously agree with this patch. "volatile" on data is evil, with the possible exception of "jiffies" type things. So applied. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
