From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id BD7CB3858C55; Tue, 20 Sep 2022 16:00:34 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BD7CB3858C55 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1663689634; bh=xvdUx57gB3ljWQTNS/zY5jySmTKueHJWvgWxgLhMPXA=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=NjZ3Fzgw0lyPseYmdRvI2JJYrgY4G2jPR/mbUOE6hYJgsEzWDqGPMWr11OtwKoJZC DD/wyXHYH0HvcareFNWDXi7ydecTgnNiBznb1surOUt4pOdEThFCvEVh/4PLTJfdnC dTCoNqgG17dOpx1NyYG52S+EjGnslkOwnE+kXnKI= From: "valera.mironow at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libstdc++/106772] atomic::wait shouldn't touch waiter pool if used platform wait Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 16:00:34 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++ X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: valera.mironow at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D106772 --- Comment #15 from Mkkt Bkkt --- > If you have an atomic counter and want to signal when it has been increm= ented, you cannot tell from the previous value whether another thread is wa= iting. I wrote it example. Do you talk about like semaphore usage? As I know in libstdc++ semaphore use bare wait without touching waiters_poo= l. Am I wrong?=