------- Comment #15 from paulmck at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com 2007-08-18 22:12 ------- (In reply to comment #13) > (In reply to comment #11) > > The main concern on the recent LKML thread appeared to be code size rather > > than > > speed. > One should note this only helps CISC based processors, it will not help stuff > like PowerPC anyways. It is better to remove volatile in 95% of the places > where the kernel uses it anyways than fix this bug.
I agree that this change won't help PowerPC. As you say, it is primarily helpful to CISC processors (x86, x86-64, mainframe, m68000, ...). Although there do appear to be places in the kernel where volatile is overused and abused, it would still be good to fix this bug. > (In reply to comment #12) > > Please accept my apologies for skipping that step -- I wasn't aware of > > this. > > Should I replicate this bug at Ubuntu, or is this strictly advice for future > > bug submissions? > > It would be better next time unless you can test it on a FSF GCC source > release/SVN. Thank you for the guidance! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33102
