archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Woodhouse <>
Cc: Dinesh Gandhewar <>,
Subject: Re: volatile variable
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 14:33:04 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0308010723060.3077@chaos>

On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 12:38, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> First, there are already procedures available to do just
> what you seem to want to do, interruptible_sleep_on() and
> interruptible_sleep_on_timeout(). These take care of the
> ugly details that can trip up compilers.

Just in case there are people reading this who don't realise that
Richard is trolling -- do not ever use sleep_on() and friends. They
_will_ introduce bugs, and hence they _will_ be removed from the kernel
some time in the (hopefully not-so-distant) future.

> In any event in your loop, variable 'a', has already been
> read by the code the compiler generates. There is nothing
> else in the loop that touches that variable. Therefore
> the compiler is free to (correctly) assume that whatever
> it was when it was first read is what it will continue to
> be. The compiler will therefore optimise it to be a single
> read and compare. So, the loop will continue forever if
> 'a' started as zero because the compiler correctly knows
> that it cannot possibly change in the only execution
> path that it knows about.

If 'a' is a local variable that's true. If 'a' is a global as the
original poster explicitly declared, then the compiler must assume that
function calls (such as the one to schedule()) may modify it, and hence
may not optimise away the second and subsequent reads. Therefore, the
'volatile' is not required.

Richard, stop taunting the newbies :)


  reply	other threads:[~2003-08-11 13:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-08-01 10:57 volatile variable Dinesh  Gandhewar
2003-08-01 11:38 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-08-11 13:33   ` David Woodhouse [this message]
2003-08-11 14:06     ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-08-11 14:37       ` Jakub Jelinek
2003-08-11 14:38       ` David Woodhouse
2003-08-11 14:40       ` David Howells
2003-08-11 14:49       ` Mike Galbraith
2003-08-11 17:07       ` Robert Love
2003-08-02 14:52 Harm Verhagen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).