> Yes, of course! No one disagrees. I am talking about *LOADS* not
> stores, your example is 100% irrelevant to my point, since it does
Ok, in the bodies of those, put in
With new definitions for j1, j2 and k3 as being volatile. Accesses are volatile:
[#2] Accessing a volatile object, modifying an object,
modifying a file, or calling a function that does any of
those operations are all side effects
So, I would claim that the case is symetric with writing volatiles.
If the standard doesn't make a distinction for write v read, then you
can't and claim that distinction is based in the standard. If you
claim the standard does make a distinction, please point it out, I am
unaware of it.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/