From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3565 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2013 14:27:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 3546 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Jan 2013 14:27:41 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:27:36 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r0MERagV021677 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:27:36 -0500 Received: from zalov.redhat.com (vpn1-4-254.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.4.254]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r0MERYjc031874 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:27:35 -0500 Received: from zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zalov.redhat.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r0MERXOJ019885; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:27:33 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by zalov.cz (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id r0MERXH0019884; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:27:33 +0100 Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:27:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Torvald Riegel , Richard Henderson Subject: Re: PR libgomp/56073: benchmark regression due to PR libgomp/51376 fix Message-ID: <20130122142733.GU7269@tucnak.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20130122110324.GL3244@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20130122111921.GR7269@tucnak.redhat.com> <20130122115200.GN3244@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20130122120124.GT7269@tucnak.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130122120124.GT7269@tucnak.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2013-01/txt/msg01094.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:01:24PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:22:00PM +1030, Alan Modra wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:19:21PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > Looks good to me. > > > > Thanks for the amazingly quick review! Committed revision 195370. > > Actually, there is one thing I'm worried about, -lgomp doesn't link against > -latomic, and for !HAVE_SYNC_BUILTINS targets supposedly __atomic_load_n > resp. __atomic_store_n might not be supported. Not sure what targets > are still !HAVE_SYNC_BUILTIN targets, but if there are any that support > libgomp, either we should use normal loads/stores for those (on the > assumption that targets without sync builtins supposedly don't have very > relaxed consistency model), or would need to take the lock always for > !HAVE_SYNC_BUILTINS and use normal loads/stores. Seems for loads/stores <= wordsize we just assume they are atomic and expand it as normal load or store (with optional barriers if target has any). So supposedly it can work as is. Jakub