This is the mail archive of the
gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Atomic floats on x86_64
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- Cc: NightStrike <nightstrike at gmail dot com>, gcc-help <gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:30:28 +0000
- Subject: Re: Atomic floats on x86_64
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAF1jjLsWNjKFacHn8V_fnc73K9mF9u04G554=qmmcqKw4uN6Jw at mail dot gmail dot com> <54607E4F dot 9070805 at redhat dot com> <CAF1jjLtq14CZ+j--myUwnrpscB9vK-D-d8PrUO8ikdZoKmg1VA at mail dot gmail dot com> <5460DA7D dot 8020008 at redhat dot com> <CAF1jjLtGd-fLfauTp+Y_mFG6K5_q24UdqOJAf_3q-birL0dpZQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <5460EBEB dot 1030009 at redhat dot com> <CAH6eHdTtvt+ht75hcxgLXZ02rTG5MTvV0kmHsrQeXsGLvN7pCw at mail dot gmail dot com> <5460FF55 dot 80504 at redhat dot com>
On 10 November 2014 18:09, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Hmm. That is reasonable enough, but given that GCC nonstandardly
> allows atomic_store() et al to work on float, why prefer a GCC
> nonstandard builtin?
No reason I can see, especially as atomic_store(&f, 1.0f) works with a
literal as the second argument while __atomic_store(&f, 1.f) doesn't.