This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Potentially merging cxx-mem-model with mainline.
- From: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>
- To: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GCC <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 09:31:00 -0700
- Subject: Re: Potentially merging cxx-mem-model with mainline.
- References: <4EA8296F.2020300@redhat.com>
> Whats left
> ===========
> Functionality is pretty much complete, but there are a few minor lose
> ends still to deal with. They could be done after a merge, in the
> next stage, or required before... you tell me :-)
>
> - potentially implement -f[no]-inline-atomics (to never produce
> inline code and always call the library) and
> -f[no]-atomic-compare-swap-loop (To not fall back to a
> compare_and_swap loop to implement missing functionality)
>
> - unaligned objects have undefined behaviour at the moment.
> Behaviour could be defined and add alignment checks and a parameter
> to __atomic_is_lock_free() for alignment checking purposes. Anything
> which doesn't map to one of the properly aligned 5 sized built-ins
> gets a library call.
> - A bit of C++ template restructuring in the include files to remove
> the old fall back locked implementation and fully use the new
> __atomic builtins. (*in progress now*)
Hit me off-line about this. Hopefully I can help expedite.
> - Change external library calls for __atomic_op_fetch routines.
> (*patch submitted already*)
>
> - There are a bunch of new tests that have been developed along the
> way, but I I expect to spend the next 2 months writing more detailed
> and specific runtime and compile time tests. And of course, fixing
> any of the fall out from those tests.
Yes. I don't see this as a blocker for the merge.
> The final word
> =============
> So what is the opinion/consensus on merging the branch? It would be
> nice to get this infrastructure in place for this release so we can
> get people to start using it, and then we can work out any issues
> that arise.
>
> I'd have Aldy do the actual merge because if I do something will go
> amok for sure. I wont be around this weekend to fix any fallout, but
> I am around until Friday evening. I'm around all next week. I don't
> anticipate much problem since this is all new functionality for the
> most part, and mainline was merged with the branch a week or two ago.
I am really expecting this branch to be merged for 4.7. The current
status is very presentable IMHO.
-benjamin