On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 06:05:55PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > Although the current direction of the C++ committee is to prefer > that dependencies are explicitly "marked", this is not deemed to be > acceptable for the kernel (in other words, everything is always considered > "marked"). Yeah, that is an attitude not compatible with existing code. Much like the proposal to allow temporary/wide stores on everything not explicitly declared atomic. Such stuff instantly breaks all extant code that does multi-threading with no recourse. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
