This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 2/4] Add atomic operations similar to those provided by C11.
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Torvald Riegel <triegel at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GLIBC Devel <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 23:31:09 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Add atomic operations similar to those provided by C11.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1414617613 dot 10085 dot 23 dot camel at triegel dot csb> <1414619416 dot 10085 dot 46 dot camel at triegel dot csb> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410292156440 dot 15119 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <1414622734 dot 10085 dot 76 dot camel at triegel dot csb> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410292257040 dot 15119 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <1414661232 dot 10085 dot 89 dot camel at triegel dot csb> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410301711530 dot 2316 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <1414693238 dot 10085 dot 150 dot camel at triegel dot csb> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410302009301 dot 16421 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <1414703481 dot 10085 dot 212 dot camel at triegel dot csb>
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-10-30 at 20:12 +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > Comparing code for one architecture, at the time of each conversion, seems
> > appropriate (with additional benchmarking for cases that don't otherwise
> > involve atomics).
>
> So, if you want this code comparison as default, we can as well start
> with using relaxed __atomic* loads and stores instead of first using
> plain loads and stores, agreed?
Yes.
> Do you have any other feedback on the patch set?
No.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com