RFR (S): 8186787: clang-4.0 SIGSEGV in Unsafe_PutByte

[Andrew Haley]

On 28/11/17 20:30, Kim Barrett wrote:
> Should there be a comment justifying the cast to volatile?  Perhaps
> something like "volatile to keep access within guarded scope."  I
> don't need a new webrev if you add such a comment.

Better:

"This raw memory access may fault, so make sure it happens while
within guarded scope."

You really do have to spell this out.

-- 
Andrew Haley
Java Platform Lead Engineer
Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671