The second patch has now been backported and pushed to releases/gcc-12 and releases/gcc-11. On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 6:06 PM Thomas Rodgers wrote: > Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Pushed to trunk. > > The first patch has also been backported and pushed to releases/gcc-12 and > releases/gcc-11 > > The second patch fails to cleanly cherry-pick. Will resolve and push > shortly. > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 4:41 PM Jonathan Wakely > wrote: > >> On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 at 18:25, Thomas Rodgers wrote: >> > >> > This patch did not get committed in a timely manner after it was OK'd. >> In revisiting the patch some issues were found that have lead me to >> resubmit for review - >> > >> > Specifically - >> > >> > The original commit to add C++20 atomic_flag::test did not include the >> free functions for atomic_flag_test[_explicit] >> > The original commit to add C++20 atomic_flag::wait/notify did not >> include the free functions for atomic_flag_wait/notify[_explicit] >> > >> > These two commits landed in GCC10 and GCC11 respectively. My original >> patch included both sets of free functions, but >> > that complicates the backporting of these changes to GCC10, GCC11, and >> GCC12. >> >> I don't think we need them in GCC 10. >> >> > Additionally commit 7c2155 removed const qualification from >> atomic_flag::notify_one/notify_all but the original version of this >> > patch accepts the atomic flag as const. >> > >> > The original version of this patch did not include test cases for the >> atomic_flag_test[_explicit] free functions. >> > >> > I have split the original patch into two patches, on for the >> atomic_flag_test free functions, and one for the atomic_flag_wait/notify >> > free functions. >> >> Thanks. >> >> For [PATCH 1/2] please name the added functions in the changelog entry: >> >> * include/std/atomic (atomic_flag_test): Add. >> (atomic_flag_test_explicit): Add. >> >> Similarly for the changelog in [PATCH 2/2], naming the four new >> functions added to include/std/atomic. >> >> The indentation is off in [PATCH 2/2] for atomic_flag: >> >> +#if __cpp_lib_atomic_wait >> + inline void >> + atomic_flag_wait(atomic_flag* __a, bool __old) noexcept >> + { __a->wait(__old); } >> + >> >> And similarly for the other three added functions. >> The function names should start in the same column as the 'inline' and >> opening brace of the function body. >> >> >> Both patches are OK for trunk, gcc-12 and gcc-11 with those changes. >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 1:35 PM Jonathan Wakely >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >+ inline void >> >> >+ atomic_flag_wait_explicit(const atomic_flag* __a, bool __old, >> >> >+ std::memory_order __m) noexcept >> >> >> >> No need for the std:: qualification, and check the indentation. >> >> >> >> >> >> > libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: >> >> > >> >> > PR103934 >> >> >> >> This needs to include the component: PR libstdc++/103934 >> >> >> >> > * include/std/atomic: Add missing free functions. >> >> >> >> Please name the new functions in the changelog, in the usual format. >> >> Just the names is fine, no need for the full signatures with >> >> parameters. >> >> >> >> OK for trunk with those changes. >> >> >> >>