From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
To: Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org>
Cc: libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libstdc++: Remove some more unconditional uses of atomics
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2023 09:17:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACb0b4mjyOnBJgYJD9JfPziB2FxLWCn_Ng-tui=j3LpM+kVGEA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPS5khaQdAi0=qsSRSHSOw=B1_4e4rQ7Zw9JsB5+K5pBKiAoZg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 14 Sept 2023 at 08:44, Christophe Lyon
<christophe.lyon@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Sept 2023 at 14:32, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Tested x86_64-linux and aarch64-linux. I intend to push this to trunk.
>>
>> -- >8 --
>>
>> These atomics cause linker errors on arm4t where __sync_synchronize is
>> not defined. For single-threaded targets we don't need the atomics.
>>
>
> I ran the tests on arm-eabi default config (so, armv4t) with this patch, and here is the list of remaining UNRESOLVED tests:
> 29_atomics/atomic/compare_exchange_padding.cc
> 29_atomics/atomic/cons/value_init.cc
> 29_atomics/atomic_float/value_init.cc
> 29_atomics/atomic_integral/cons/value_init.cc
> 29_atomics/atomic_ref/compare_exchange_padding.cc
> 29_atomics/atomic_ref/generic.cc
> 29_atomics/atomic_ref/integral.cc
> 29_atomics/atomic_ref/pointer.cc
> experimental/polymorphic_allocator/construct_pair.cc
>
> all of them are due to undefined reference to __sync_synchronize
> (some also reference __atomic_compare_exchange_4, etc...)
>
>
> IIUC, this should not be the case for experimental/polymorphic_allocator/construct_pair.cc ?
> The reference for __sync_synchronize is near the beginning of test0[123]
> from a call to __atomic_load_n line 835 of atomic_base.h
> not sure where it comes from, the .loc directive indicates line 28 of the testcase which is the opening brace
Doh, I removed the atomics from <memory_resource> but this is
<experimental/memory_resource>, which has a separate implementation.
I'll make a change to <experimental/memory_resource> as well, thanks
for catching my silly mistake.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-14 8:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-13 12:31 Jonathan Wakely
2023-09-14 7:43 ` Christophe Lyon
2023-09-14 8:17 ` Jonathan Wakely [this message]
2023-09-14 8:41 ` Christophe Lyon
2023-09-14 9:06 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-09-14 9:11 ` Christophe Lyon
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='CACb0b4mjyOnBJgYJD9JfPziB2FxLWCn_Ng-tui=j3LpM+kVGEA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jwakely@redhat.com \
--cc=christophe.lyon@linaro.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=libstdc++@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).