Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] arch: atomic rework

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Torvald Riegel <triegel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I think a major benefit of C11's memory model is that it gives a
> *precise* specification for how a compiler is allowed to optimize.

Clearly it does *not*. This whole discussion is proof of that. It's
not at all clear, and the standard apparently is at least debatably
allowing things that shouldn't be allowed. It's also a whole lot more
complicated than "volatile", so the likelihood of a compiler writer
actually getting it right - even if the standard does - is lower.
They've gotten "volatile" wrong too, after all (particularly in C++).

           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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux