public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "dje at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/51766] [4.7 regression] sync_fetch_and_xxx atomicity
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 14:40:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-51766-4-0JK2sVemb9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-51766-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51766

--- Comment #5 from David Edelsohn <dje at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-01-10 14:39:16 UTC ---
I understand that fixing __sync_* is a hassle.  This is why I opened a separate
bug for libstdc++.

While __sync_* is deprecated in favor of __atomic_*, use of __sync_* for
portability is fairly pervasive in FOSS applications that need it because of
its implementation in GCC.  Most programmers do not know about memory models
and do not care about memory models.  And it will take time for programmers to
switch to __atomic_*, if they even bother to choose a memory model and don't
introduce a bug.

The basic problem is MEMMODEL_SEQ_CST only makes a performance difference for
POWER and developers are going to continue to use __sync_* builtins for a
while.  This change in default behavior only hurts performance for applications
on POWER relative to all other architectures, which sucks. :-(


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-01-10 14:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-05 15:01 [Bug middle-end/51766] New: " dje at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-05 15:02 ` [Bug middle-end/51766] " dje at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-09 15:40 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-09 15:45 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-09 16:51 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-10  9:43 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-10 14:40 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2012-01-10 14:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-10 15:31 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-10 18:09 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-10 18:20 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-10 18:24 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-10 18:34 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-10 18:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-10 19:14 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2012-01-10 20:26 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-12 20:41 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-51766-4-0JK2sVemb9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).