Re: __{read,write}_once

[Jason Thorpe <thorpej%me.com@localhost>]

> On Nov 6, 2019, at 5:41 AM, Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost> wrote:
> 
> On 06.11.2019 14:37, Jason Thorpe wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 6, 2019, at 4:45 AM, Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I propose __write_relaxed() / __read_relaxed().
>> 
>> ...except that seems to imply the opposite of what these do.
>> 
>> -- thorpej
>> 
> 
> Rationale?
> 
> This matches atomic_load_relaxed() / atomic_write_relaxed(), but we do
> not deal with atomics here.

Fair enough.  To me, the names suggest "compiler is allowed to apply relaxed constraints and tear the access if it wants".... But apparently the common meaning is "relax, bro, I know what I'm doing".  If that's the case, I can roll with it.

-- thorpej