diff --git a/docs/csharp/misc/cs0677.md b/docs/csharp/misc/cs0677.md
index 394a3ea490713..0fb29b8074ac5 100644
--- a/docs/csharp/misc/cs0677.md
+++ b/docs/csharp/misc/cs0677.md
@@ -14,13 +14,13 @@ ms.assetid: 6a4a3703-9b44-4c4f-a564-8b437b1cb6b8
   
  Fields declared with the `volatile` keyword must be one of the following types:  
   
-- Any reference type  
+- Any reference type.
   
-- Any pointer type (in an `unsafe` context)  
+- Any pointer type (in an `unsafe` context).
   
-- The types `sbyte`, **byte**, **short**, `ushort`, `int`, `uint`, `char`, **float**, `bool`  
+- The types `sbyte`, `byte`, `short`, `ushort`, `int`, `uint`, `char`, `float`, `bool`.
   
-- Enum types based on any of the above types  
+- Enum types based on any of the listed types.  
   
  The following sample generates CS0677:  
   
@@ -35,3 +35,28 @@ class TestClass
    }  
 }  
 ```
+
+## Potential workarounds
+
+In some scenarios, you might be able to use `nint` (native-sized integer) instead of `long` as a workaround for CS0677. The `nint` type is guaranteed to support atomic access and can be used with the `volatile` keyword:
+
+```csharp
+class TestClass  
+{  
+   private volatile nint i;   // This compiles successfully
+  
+   public static void Main()  
+   {  
+   }  
+}  
+```
+
+The `nint` type is a native-sized integer that's 32-bit on 32-bit platforms and 64-bit on 64-bit platforms. On 64-bit platforms, `nint` has the same size and range as `long`, but it's designed to guarantee atomic access. This workaround is most appropriate when:
+
+- Your code targets 64-bit platforms where `nint` provides the same range as `long`.
+- You need atomic access to a large integer value in a multithreaded context.
+- Platform-specific integer size behavior is acceptable for your use case.
+
+For more information about native-sized integers, see [Integral numeric types](../language-reference/builtin-types/integral-numeric-types.md#native-sized-integers).
+
+As general guidance on thread-safe programming, consider using <xref:System.Threading.Interlocked> operations or the [`lock`](../language-reference/statements/lock.md) statement instead of `volatile` fields.