From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Rodgers <rodgert@appliantology.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org,
trodgers@redhat.com, Thomas Rodgers <rodgert@twrodgers.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [libstdc++] Refactor/cleanup of atomic wait implementation
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 14:20:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210420132039.GI3008@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210420120215.GH3008@redhat.com>
On 20/04/21 13:02 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>On 19/04/21 12:23 -0700, Thomas Rodgers wrote:
>>+ template<typename _Up, typename _ValFn,
>>+ typename _Spin = __default_spin_policy>
>>+ static bool
>>+ _S_do_spin_v(__platform_wait_t* __addr,
>>+ const _Up& __old, _ValFn __vfn,
>>+ __platform_wait_t& __val,
>>+ _Spin __spin = _Spin{ })
>>+ {
>>+ auto const __pred = [=]
>>+ { return __atomic_compare(__old, __vfn()); };
>
>This doesn't compile, there are 28 FAILs in 29_atomics/*
>
>FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic_integral/cons/value_init.cc (test for excess errors)
>
>It needs to be qualified as __detail::__atomic_compare.
Ah no, the problem is that atomic_flag::wait uses it, but it tries to
compare a bool to atomic_flag::__atomic_flag_data_type, which isn't
the same.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-20 13:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-22 21:53 Thomas Rodgers
2021-02-23 21:57 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-03-03 15:14 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-03-03 17:31 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-03-23 19:00 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-04-15 12:46 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-04-19 19:23 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-04-20 9:18 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-04-20 11:04 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-04-20 11:41 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-04-20 14:25 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-04-20 14:26 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-04-20 12:02 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-04-20 13:20 ` Jonathan Wakely [this message]
2021-04-20 13:28 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-04-20 13:38 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-04-20 13:50 ` Jonathan Wakely
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=20210420132039.GI3008@redhat.com \
--to=jwakely@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=rodgert@appliantology.com \
--cc=rodgert@twrodgers.com \
--cc=trodgers@redhat.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).