From: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Rodgers <rodgert@appliantology.com>
Cc: Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira@intel.com>,
Thomas Rodgers <trodgers@redhat.com>,
Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>,
"libstdc++" <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: C++2a synchronisation inefficient in GCC 11
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2021 04:02:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFk2RUbyXvBH0KrJASC=uDo2O1LtY4Zcr80UizWYwejpSg+HXw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <62df56697b99a0ab414e8f1e35f10b0b@appliantology.com>
On Sat, 27 Feb 2021 at 03:53, Thomas Rodgers <rodgert@appliantology.com> wrote:
>
> We are SPECIFICALLY NOT committing to an ABI for wait/notify with GCC11.
> These features are experimental and I have no intention of treating this
> as a blocker.
Oh, treating it as a blocker would be madness. But Thiago has a point
- if you have GCC11 code
and GCC13 code, with the same feature-macros and everything compiles
the same, and there's
an ABI break between those, that's not entirely a non-issue. I'm *NOT*
suggesting that that's
a new problem; we did that with std::variant, although I don't exactly
recall whether it was actually
released before I changed the size of its index type depending on the
number of alternatives it can
have. I'm merely saying that it's not a non-issue. I'm yet to
determine how significant this is.
Let's just calmly look at it and ponder.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-27 2:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-25 22:50 Thiago Macieira
2021-02-26 11:19 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-02-26 17:37 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-02-26 18:29 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-02-26 19:30 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-02-26 21:17 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-02-26 21:18 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-02-26 21:39 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-02-26 18:47 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-02-26 23:53 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-02-26 23:58 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-02-27 0:11 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-02-27 0:18 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-02-27 0:36 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-02-27 0:44 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-02-27 0:53 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-02-27 1:03 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-03-03 14:30 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-03-03 17:07 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-03-03 17:14 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-02-27 0:22 ` Marc Glisse
2021-02-27 0:30 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-02-27 0:43 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-03-03 14:24 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-03-03 17:12 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-02-26 15:59 ` [PATCH 1/5] std::latch: reduce internal implementation from ptrdiff_t to int Thiago Macieira
2021-02-26 15:59 ` [PATCH 2/5] Atomic __platform_wait: accept any 32-bit type, not just int Thiago Macieira
2021-03-03 14:34 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-03-03 16:21 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-03-03 17:27 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-03-03 17:34 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-03-03 17:41 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-02-26 15:59 ` [PATCH 3/5] std::__atomic_wait: don't use __detail::__waiter with futex Thiago Macieira
2021-02-26 15:59 ` [PATCH 4/5] barrier: use int instead of unsigned char for the phase state Thiago Macieira
2021-02-28 15:05 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2021-03-01 16:28 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-03-01 17:24 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-03-01 17:38 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-03-01 17:40 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-03-01 18:06 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-03-01 19:08 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-03-01 18:12 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-03-01 19:44 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-03-01 20:35 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-03-01 21:54 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-03-01 22:04 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-03-01 22:21 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-03-01 22:31 ` Ville Voutilainen
2021-03-01 22:40 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-02-26 15:59 ` [PATCH 5/5] barrier: optimise by not having the hasher in a loop Thiago Macieira
2021-03-03 14:36 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-02-26 18:14 ` [PATCH 1/5] std::latch: reduce internal implementation from ptrdiff_t to int Andreas Schwab
2021-02-26 19:08 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-02-26 19:31 ` Andreas Schwab
2021-02-27 0:13 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-02-28 21:31 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2021-03-01 8:56 ` Richard Biener
2021-03-03 14:56 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-03-03 15:02 ` Andreas Schwab
2021-03-03 15:10 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-03-03 15:37 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2021-03-01 16:32 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-03-03 14:34 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-03-03 17:14 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-03-03 17:18 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-02-27 1:13 ` C++2a synchronisation inefficient in GCC 11 Thomas Rodgers
2021-02-27 1:29 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-02-27 3:01 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-03-01 17:46 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-03-01 18:00 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-03-01 18:34 ` Thomas Rodgers
2021-03-01 19:11 ` Thiago Macieira
2021-02-27 2:02 ` Ville Voutilainen [this message]
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='CAFk2RUbyXvBH0KrJASC=uDo2O1LtY4Zcr80UizWYwejpSg+HXw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=ville.voutilainen@gmail.com \
--cc=jwakely@redhat.com \
--cc=libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=rodgert@appliantology.com \
--cc=thiago.macieira@intel.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).