From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/11607 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jens Gustedt Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: more on missing volatile qualifications Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 10:45:16 +0200 Organization: inria.fr Message-ID: <20170625104516.17ac9466@inria.fr> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/sC5eObaa55+Ef1IkN.9jAue"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1498380334 19836 195.159.176.226 (25 Jun 2017 08:45:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 08:45:34 +0000 (UTC) To: musl Original-X-From: musl-return-11620-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sun Jun 25 10:45:28 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dP3Ae-0004oF-0Z for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2017 10:45:28 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 25843 invoked by uid 550); 25 Jun 2017 08:45:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 25811 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2017 08:45:29 -0000 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.39,389,1493676000"; d="scan'208";a="280501847" X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAACRQTFRFERslNjAsLTE9Ok9wUk9TaUs8iWhSrYZkj42Rz6aD3sGZ Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:11607 Archived-At: --Sig_/sC5eObaa55+Ef1IkN.9jAue Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, I forced my compiler into reporting inconsistencies concerning the usage (or not) of volatile, and I came up with three other spots that I would like to patch. These are - the definition of pthread_once_t - the definition of pthread_spinlock_t - the handler array in sigaction.c All three could benefit for an additional volatile qualification. All their usages are already so, so this would just be conservative and not risk any incompatibilities, I think. Also, I can't think of any semantics for the three, where opitimizing out loads or stores makes any sense, so this also should never see any kind of performance regression. Jens --=20 :: INRIA Nancy Grand Est ::: Camus ::::::: ICube/ICPS ::: :: ::::::::::::::: office Strasbourg : +33 368854536 :: :: :::::::::::::::::::::: gsm France : +33 651400183 :: :: ::::::::::::::: gsm international : +49 15737185122 :: :: http://icube-icps.unistra.fr/index.php/Jens_Gustedt :: --Sig_/sC5eObaa55+Ef1IkN.9jAue Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EARECAB0WIQSN9stI2OFN1pLljN0P0+hp2tU34gUCWU94HAAKCRAP0+hp2tU3 4sOqAJ438BwW6tdSSiM2gPcfk25F/CzeDQCfS8XpYFUYJWqkBxus0Nh5QBfjSZc= =IWl4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/sC5eObaa55+Ef1IkN.9jAue--