This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ 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: volatile qualifier hurts single-threaded optimized case


Richard Guenther wrote:

I got from Paolo that we do not care about rope anyway, so I'll ignore that in
the following. Patches for mt_allocator and pool_allocator have been posted
and discussed here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2006-07/msg00031.html
I think the pool_allocator patch is not safe because it changes
function signatures,
while the mt_allocator patch is still applicable to v3.

Too bad, because the pool_allocator patch seemed absolutely safe from every possible point of view. I'm afraid the same cannot be said about the mt_allocator patch: in that case we *do* have a long standing race in the deallocation function (in Bugzilla) and if only part of Hans reasoning applies to that specific code, I would not remove the volatiles...


Paolo.


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