在标准C中，使用volatile的一个地方是在信号处理程序中。事实上，在标准C中，在信号处理程序中可以安全地做的就是修改易失性sig_atomic_t变量，或者快速退出。事实上，AFAIK，这是标准C中唯一需要使用volatile来避免未定义行为的地方。

ISO/IEC 9899:2011 §7.14.1.1 The signal function ¶5 If the signal occurs other than as the result of calling the abort or raise function, the behavior is undefined if the signal handler refers to any object with static or thread storage duration that is not a lock-free atomic object other than by assigning a value to an object declared as volatile sig_atomic_t, or the signal handler calls any function in the standard library other than the abort function, the _Exit function, the quick_exit function, or the signal function with the first argument equal to the signal number corresponding to the signal that caused the invocation of the handler. Furthermore, if such a call to the signal function results in a SIG_ERR return, the value of errno is indeterminate.252) 252) If any signal is generated by an asynchronous signal handler, the behavior is undefined.

这意味着在标准C中，你可以这样写:

static volatile sig_atomic_t sig_num = 0;

static void sig_handler(int signum)
{
    signal(signum, sig_handler);
    sig_num = signum;
}

除此之外就没什么了。

POSIX对于在信号处理程序中可以做的事情要宽容得多，但仍然存在限制(其中一个限制是标准I/O库- printf()等-不能安全地使用)。

您必须使用它来实现自旋锁以及一些(所有?)无锁数据结构 与原子操作/指令一起使用 曾经帮助我克服编译器的错误(在优化过程中错误地生成代码)

为嵌入式开发，我有一个循环，检查可以在中断处理程序中更改的变量。如果没有“volatile”，循环就变成了noop——就编译器所知，变量永远不会改变，所以它优化了检查。

同样的事情也适用于在更传统的环境中可能在不同线程中更改的变量，但在那里我们经常进行同步调用，因此编译器在优化方面没有那么自由。

如果你正在从内存中的某个点(比如说，一个完全独立的进程/设备/任何东西)读取数据，则需要使用Volatile。

我曾经在纯c的多处理器系统中使用双端口ram。我们使用硬件管理的16位值作为信号量，以知道另一个家伙什么时候完成。基本上我们是这样做的:

void waitForSemaphore()
{
   volatile uint16_t* semPtr = WELL_KNOWN_SEM_ADDR;/*well known address to my semaphore*/
   while ((*semPtr) != IS_OK_FOR_ME_TO_PROCEED);
}

没有volatile，优化器认为循环是无用的(这家伙从不设置值!他疯了，删掉那代码吧!)，我的代码会在没有获得信号量的情况下继续运行，从而在以后造成问题。

我想引用Herb Sutter在GotW #95中的一句话，这有助于理解volatile变量的含义:

C++ volatile variables (which have no analog in languages like C# and Java) are always beyond the scope of this and any other article about the memory model and synchronization. That’s because C++ volatile variables aren’t about threads or communication at all and don’t interact with those things. Rather, a C++ volatile variable should be viewed as portal into a different universe beyond the language — a memory location that by definition does not obey the language’s memory model because that memory location is accessed by hardware (e.g., written to by a daughter card), have more than one address, or is otherwise “strange” and beyond the language. So C++ volatile variables are universally an exception to every guideline about synchronization because are always inherently “racy” and unsynchronizable using the normal tools (mutexes, atomics, etc.) and more generally exist outside all normal of the language and compiler including that they generally cannot be optimized by the compiler (because the compiler isn’t allowed to know their semantics; a volatile int vi; may not behave anything like a normal int, and you can’t even assume that code like vi = 5; int read_back = vi; is guaranteed to result in read_back == 5, or that code like int i = vi; int j = vi; that reads vi twice will result in i == j which will not be true if vi is a hardware counter for example).

在实现无锁数据结构时必须使用volatile。否则，编译器可以自由地优化对变量的访问，这将改变语义。

换句话说，volatile告诉编译器对这个变量的访问必须对应于物理内存的读/写操作。

例如，这是Win32 API中InterlockedIncrement的声明方式:

LONG __cdecl InterlockedIncrement(
  __inout  LONG volatile *Addend
);