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: Thread starvation and resource saturation in atomicity functions?



"Chad Attermann" <chad@broadmind.com> writes:


Running at least i486 code would make sense on AMD Opteron processors. I am shocked that the gcc version shipped by Sun Microsystems would be compiled for i386. I compiled my own version of gcc 4.2.2 n the same platform and it too appears to have used i386 code. Perhaps the gcc build configuration process for Solaris is flawed? Regardless I will be attempting to build a new version today that is forced to use the i486 code. Would apprecite if you have any tips.

My bad... I was mistakenly thinking I needed re-build gcc in order to get i486 code. In reality I should only need to specify the architecture type when building my own application using "-march=i486", or perhaps even "-march=opteron" in my own case.


As stated in gcc docs, i386 is the default instruction set for "i386 and x86-64 family of computers" when the architecture is not explicitly defined, so presumably atomic test-and-set operations will use spin-locks by default. So I suppose the moral of the story remains... excercise extreme caution when using varying thread priorities.

Regards.


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