Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] arch: atomic rework

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 07:44:32PM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> xagsmtp3.20140220184514.1789@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> X-Xagent-Gateway: bldgate.vnet.ibm.com (XAGSMTP3 at BLDGATE)
> 
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 10:11 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > But yes, the compiler guys would be extremely happy to simply drop
> > memory_order_consume from the standard, as it is the memory order
> > that they most love to hate.
> > 
> > Getting them to agree to any sort of peep-hole optimization semantics
> > for memory_order_consume is likely problematic.  
> 
> I wouldn't be so pessimistic about that.  If the transformations can be
> shown to be always correct in terms of the semantics specified in the
> standard, and if the performance win is sufficiently large, why not?  Of
> course, somebody has to volunteer to actually implement it :)

I guess that there is only one way to find out.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/