From: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>
To: "Boehm, Hans" <hans.boehm@hp.com>
Cc: Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@gnu.org>,
"Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
"java-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <java-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Java: add flag_use_atomic_builtins
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A8310FD.5070406@caviumnetworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <238A96A773B3934685A7269CC8A8D042577A01E754@GVW0436EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Boehm, Hans wrote:
> [Partially replying to myself]
>> From: Boehm, Hans
>>
>> At the risk of asking a stupid question, shouldn't all the
>> code inside gcc gradually migrate towards using the C++0x
>> (and probably C1x) atomics, which seem to be generally
>> supported by gcc 4.4?
>>
>> There are known issues with __sync (no atomic loads and
>> stores, underspecified ordering), which is why there wasn't
>> much of an effort topush the __sync interface into C++0x.
>>
>> Hans
>>
> OK. That was largely a stupid question, since we're talking about the compiler implementation of those primitives, which presumably are shared with the atomic<T> implementation?
>
The generic implementation uses __sync*, but some individual targets
have hand coded asm blocks.
David Daney
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-12 19:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-12 16:09 Andrew Haley
2009-08-12 16:49 ` Joseph S. Myers
2009-08-12 16:54 ` Andrew Haley
2009-08-12 16:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2009-08-12 17:05 ` Andrew Haley
2009-08-12 17:17 ` Andrew Haley
2009-08-12 18:08 ` Boehm, Hans
2009-08-12 18:25 ` Boehm, Hans
2009-08-12 18:27 ` Richard Guenther
2009-08-12 19:00 ` David Daney [this message]
2009-08-12 18:08 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=4A8310FD.5070406@caviumnetworks.com \
--to=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=aph@redhat.com \
--cc=bonzini@gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hans.boehm@hp.com \
--cc=java-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
/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).