Ensure sequential consistency in fallback implementation when requested#38
Open
taylordotfish wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Ensure sequential consistency in fallback implementation when requested#38taylordotfish wants to merge 2 commits into
taylordotfish wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
Owner
|
GCC's libatomic does things differently: it effectively inserts a I am not completely sure which approach is the correct one. |
Use `SeqCst` for both acquiring and releasing the spinlock when the corresponding atomic operation is `SeqCst`. This may not be strictly necessary, but it can't hurt.
Author
|
Well, I should probably trust GCC's developers' understanding of atomics more than my own, and in any case, the extra assurance can't hurt, so I've modified the PR to acquire the lock with |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As discussed in #37, use
Ordering::SeqCstwhen unlocking the spinlock if the corresponding atomic operation had a requested ordering ofSeqCst. Otherwise, the existingReleaseordering should be fine. The lock operation can remain unconditionallyAcquire; it always occurs as part of an “atomic” lock/unlock pair.