From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64880385BF9E for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 16:35:56 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 64880385BF9E Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-251-FI1_-vB5O5yis3IHM0NOYg-1; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 12:35:52 -0400 X-MC-Unique: FI1_-vB5O5yis3IHM0NOYg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03ECD814337; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 16:35:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.33.36.164]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F19AA5C224; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 16:35:49 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 16:35:49 +0000 From: Jonathan Wakely To: Thiago Macieira Cc: Thomas Rodgers , libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Uncontroversial improvements to C++20 wait-related implementation Message-ID: <20210323163549.GZ3008@redhat.com> References: <5409427.gSZZmAiMah@tjmaciei-mobl1> <7b6c37eaf5ececeed36c027d16e44cc6@appliantology.com> <95092538.BtUSnq0jnV@tjmaciei-mobl1> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <95092538.BtUSnq0jnV@tjmaciei-mobl1> X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libstdc++ mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 16:35:57 -0000 On 23/03/21 09:26 -0700, Thiago Macieira via Libstdc++ wrote: >On Tuesday, 23 March 2021 08:39:43 PDT Thomas Rodgers wrote: >> I will be submitting a new patch for the >> atomic.wait/barrier/latch/semaphore functionality a bit later today that >> subsumes the changes to atomic_wait and latch, and includes the changes >> to barrier. > >Thanks, Thomas > >Is that meant to be part of GCC 11's release? Yes. >If not, what do we do about preventing the future BC break and potential >heisenbugs? > > 1) do nothing, accept they will happen silently This is our current policy for experimental features and it isn't going to change for GCC 11. > 2) cause non-silent BC breaks > 3) disable the code for now (unless explicitly opted-in) > >-- >Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Software Architect - Intel DPG Cloud Engineering > > >