May volatile be in user defined types to help writing thread-safe code

Question

I know, it has been made quite clear in a couple of questions/answers before, that volatile is related to the visible state of the c++ memory model and not to m

Answer 1

In the article the keyword is used more like a required_thread_safety tag than the actual intended use of volatile.

Without having read the article – why isn’t Andrei using said required_thread_safety tag then? Abusing volatile doesn’t sound such a good idea here. I believe this causes more confusion (like you said), rather than avoiding it.

That said, volatile may sometimes be required in multi-threaded code even if it’s not a sufficient condition, just to prevent the compiler from optimizing away checks that rely on asynchronous update of a value.