From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29950 invoked by alias); 11 May 2013 10:59:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 29763 invoked by uid 48); 11 May 2013 10:59:32 -0000 From: "LpSolit at netscape dot net" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug web/52239] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 4.4 Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 10:59:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: web X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: LpSolit at netscape dot net X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: LpSolit at netscape dot net 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 X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00753.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D52239 --- Comment #19 from Fr=C3=A9d=C3=A9ric Buclin --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #17) > the "Keywords" field auto-completes when editing an existing bug, but not= in > the form to create a new bug. I seem to remember that it used to work... Fixed! >>From gcc-bugs-return-422081-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat May 11 12:21:31 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30624 invoked by alias); 11 May 2013 12:21:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30604 invoked by uid 48); 11 May 2013 12:21:28 -0000 From: "daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libstdc++/57250] New: [C++11] std::shared_ptr misses atomic_* support Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 12:21:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED 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: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00754.txt.bz2 Content-length: 1379 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57250 Bug ID: 57250 Summary: [C++11] std::shared_ptr misses atomic_* support Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com Consider this as a reminder bug entry to provide the atomic_* overloads for std::shared_ptr. A minimal test case could be: #include int main() { const std::shared_ptr p; bool is_lock_free = std::atomic_is_lock_free(&p); std::shared_ptr p2 = std::atomic_load(&p); std::shared_ptr p3 = std::atomic_load_explicit(&p, std::memory_order_seq_cst); std::atomic_store(&p2, p); std::atomic_store_explicit(&p2, p, std::memory_order_seq_cst); std::shared_ptr p4 = std::atomic_exchange(&p2, p); p4 = std::atomic_exchange_explicit(&p2, p, std::memory_order_seq_cst); bool chk = std::atomic_compare_exchange_weak(&p2, &p3, p); chk = std::atomic_compare_exchange_strong(&p2, &p3, p); chk = std::atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit(&p2, &p3, p, std::memory_order_seq_cst, std::memory_order_seq_cst); chk = std::atomic_compare_exchange_strong_explicit(&p2, &p3, p, std::memory_order_seq_cst, std::memory_order_seq_cst); }