From: Alexander Monakov <amonakov@ispras.ru>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-help <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Libatomic 16B
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 17:10:28 +0300 (MSK) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cdcb45d8-a44b-cd3c-e714-d154f06881e4@ispras.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <874k4nvye3.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
On Fri, 25 Feb 2022, Florian Weimer via Gcc-help wrote:
> * Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-help:
>
> > On Fri, 2022-02-25 at 09:35 +0100, Stefan Ring via Gcc-help wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:39 PM Satish Vasudeva via Gcc-help
> >> <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Please let into this intel architecture manual , section 8.1.1
> >> >
> >> > https://cdrdv2.intel.com/v1/dl/getContent/671190
> >> >
> >> > I think Intel claims 16B operations are atomic , unless I am missing
> >> > something.
> >>
> >> Interesting. This seems to be a somewhat recent addition, and the
> >> mailing list discussion linked to above predates it. Coincidentally, I
> >> pulled a copy of the Intel manuals at almost exactly the same time as
> >> this discussion, and sure enough, it does not yet contain the
> >> paragraph about 16 byte operations.
> >
> > It seems an addition in Dec 2021 revision:
> > https://cdrdv2.intel.com/v1/dl/getContent/671294
> >
> > Create an issue in bugzilla then?
>
> Yes please. I should have read the whole thread first. 8-)
>
> The AMD manual doesn't say this yet, so any optimization needs to be
> restricted to Intel CPUs for now. I'll reach out to AMD to get
> clarification.
This StackOverflow question has evidence that both Intel (Core Duo) and
AMD (Opteron 2435) can tear 128-bit loads. So neither manufacturer can
give a retroactive guarantee.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7646018/sse-instructions-which-cpus-can-do-atomic-16b-memory-operations
Alexander
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-25 14:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-23 16:42 Satish Vasudeva
2022-02-24 16:42 ` Satish Vasudeva
2022-02-25 13:53 ` Florian Weimer
2022-02-24 19:09 ` Xi Ruoyao
2022-02-24 19:35 ` Satish Vasudeva
2022-02-24 20:05 ` Xi Ruoyao
2022-02-24 20:13 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-02-24 20:38 ` Satish Vasudeva
2022-02-25 8:35 ` Stefan Ring
2022-02-25 8:48 ` Xi Ruoyao
2022-02-25 14:01 ` Florian Weimer
2022-02-25 14:10 ` Alexander Monakov [this message]
2022-02-25 14:16 ` Xi Ruoyao
2022-02-25 14:25 ` Xi Ruoyao
2022-02-25 17:05 ` Satish Vasudeva
2022-02-25 17:16 ` Xi Ruoyao
2022-02-25 17:25 ` Satish Vasudeva
2022-03-02 0:16 ` Satish Vasudeva
2022-03-02 5:55 ` Florian Weimer
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=cdcb45d8-a44b-cd3c-e714-d154f06881e4@ispras.ru \
--to=amonakov@ispras.ru \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-help@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).