This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

RE: Optimization of conditional access to globals: thread-unsafe?

From: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
To: dave dot korn at artimi dot com
Cc: aph-gcc at littlepinkcloud dot com, bart dot vanassche at gmail dot com, dewar at adacore dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, pinskia at gmail dot com, tomash dot brechko at gmail dot com
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:07:42 EDT
Subject: RE: Optimization of conditional access to globals: thread-unsafe?
References: <e2e108260710260634q7a291337s6e66dfa25f28b68a@mail.gmail.com> <e2e108260710260705s170a7c82udb0c9db26a408d84@mail.gmail.com> <18210.795.425145.46885@zebedee.pink> <47220475.4000703@adacore.com> <016001c817e4$41052e20$2e08a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM>

     I thought it was pretty clear in intent: the compiler will emit
     exactly one machine load/store operation for any rvalue
     reference/lvalue assignment (respectively) in the source, at the exact
     sequence point in the generated code corresponding to the location of
     the reference in the source.

The problem is that "one machine load/store operation" and "any rvalue"
aren't precisely-defined terms.  We've had numerous discussions on this
list before about how one might want to define them.

References:
- Re: Optimization of conditional access to globals: thread-unsafe?
  - From: Bart Van Assche
- Re: Optimization of conditional access to globals: thread-unsafe?
  - From: Andrew Haley
- Re: Optimization of conditional access to globals: thread-unsafe?
  - From: Robert Dewar
- RE: Optimization of conditional access to globals: thread-unsafe?
  - From: Dave Korn

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]