On 06.11.2019 16:58, David Young wrote: > I *think* the intention is for __read_once()/__write_once() to > load/store the entire variable from/to memory precisely once. They > provide no guarantees about atomicity of the load/store. Should > something be said about ordering and visibility of stores? The original intention is to mark reads and writes racy-OK. once is a bad name as it suggests some variation of RUN_ONCE(). I am for memory ordering name relaxed, borrowed from the terminology atomics.
Description: OpenPGP digital signature