public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "amacleod at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libstdc++/51798] [4.7 regression] libstdc++ atomicity performance regression due to __sync_fetch_and_add Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 07:45:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-51798-4-QalcKt5QHG@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-51798-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51798 Andrew Macleod <amacleod at redhat dot com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bkoz at redhat dot com --- Comment #4 from Andrew Macleod <amacleod at redhat dot com> 2012-01-24 05:41:43 UTC --- Looking at the old sync.md and rs6000.c files, it looks to me like sync_fetch_and_add always issued a lwsync before the operation and an isync afterwards. With the new atomics, it looks like making these fetch_and_add operations use acq_rel mode, we'd get exactly the same code. I suspect it would be safe to convert those uses in atomicity.h to acq_rel. If acq_rel wasn't sufficient, power would likely have had a defect somewhere over the years... At least that would appear to be safe(r) to me on the surface... And it would return the missing performance? I'd be more hesitant about relaxing the mode any further than that.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-24 5:42 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2012-01-09 14:31 [Bug libstdc++/51798] New: " dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-09 14:36 ` [Bug libstdc++/51798] " dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-09 14:38 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-09 15:43 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-09 17:12 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-24 7:45 ` amacleod at redhat dot com [this message] 2012-01-24 16:46 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-24 16:51 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2012-01-25 14:27 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-25 15:39 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-25 16:09 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2012-01-25 16:17 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-26 13:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-26 14:38 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2012-01-26 15:50 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-26 15:53 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-26 21:50 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-26 22:08 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-27 10:09 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-27 11:37 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-27 13:03 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2012-01-27 14:55 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-27 15:01 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-27 15:26 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-27 20:15 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-27 21:05 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-27 21:08 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-09 8:46 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-09 9:16 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-09 20:08 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-09 23:22 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-10 18:21 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-13 21:31 ` rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-17 21:03 ` bkoz 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-51798-4-QalcKt5QHG@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: linkBe 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).