public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "hp at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/54005] Use __atomic_always_lock_free in libstdc++ is_lock_free instead of __atomic_is_lock_free
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 22:23:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-54005-4-dr55JZBwag@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-54005-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54005

--- Comment #10 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-08-16 22:23:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Actually, that's the way __atomic_is_lock_free()  has always been implemented
> (even in 4.7).  

There's miscommunication here.  The point of this PR is, the code for
is_lock_free must be per-type, agreed?  It used __atomic_is_lock_free() with a
non-null pointer, hence it was per-object, a bug, agreed?  (Mr. Crowl asserts
on IRC what can be understood from the referenced URL; that the function
started as per-object but semantics later changed to be per-type.)

The committed changes were to make it use __atomic_always_lock_free() so
per-type.
IIUC you mean it should instead use __atomic_is_lock_free() with the object
pointer changed to NULL.  That might be: whether that is preferred to r190216 I
can't say, in particular with a pending rewrite.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-08-16 22:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-07-17 21:39 [Bug libstdc++/54005] New: " hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-07 23:04 ` [Bug libstdc++/54005] " bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-08 15:04 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2012-08-14  2:46 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-14  3:20 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2012-08-14  3:27 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2012-08-14  3:52 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-14 13:46 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2012-08-14 22:16 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-14 22:45 ` amacleod at redhat dot com
2012-08-16 22:23 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2012-08-28 18:10 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-28 22:00 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-30 19:25 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-25 18:03 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-27  6:55 ` hp at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-03  2:37 ` hp 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-54005-4-dr55JZBwag@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).