This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3
- From: Florian Weimer <fw at deneb dot enyo dot de>
- To: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>
- Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, rth at redhat dot com, Ian Lance Taylor <ian at airs dot com>
- Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 21:31:22 +0100
- Subject: Re: Call for compiler help/advice: atomic builtins for v3
- References: <436DDC36.8070308@suse.de> <436E4DF0.3070004@codesourcery.com><436E51C4.8060108@suse.de>
* Paolo Carlini:
> Actually, the situation is not as bad, as far as I can see: the worst
> case is i386 vs i486+, and Old-Sparc vs New-Sparc. More generally, a
> targer either cannot implement the builtin at all (a trivial fall back
> using locks or no MT support at all) or can in no more than 1
> non-trivial way.
Isn't IA32 a counter-example for this? Non-SMP or non-threaded
(normal INC/DEC), SMP (LOCK INC/DEC), and modern SMP (something else)
already results in three choices.