Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch > #6298

Re: Pseudo-atomic - atomic operations that can fail

Show all headers | View raw

On 3/7/2012 9:59 AM, MitchAlsup wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 6, 2012 10:23:39 PM UTC-6, Andy (Super) Glew wrote:
>> Why, then, provide pseudo-atomicity?
>>
>> * Pseudo-atomic operations allow complicated atomic operations to be
>> built up out of simpler
>> * Plus, of course, it is easier than providing real atomicity.  Most of
>> the time it works.  Most of the time may be good enough for many people,
>> who may not care if it occasionally crashes when the seldom used
>> alternate path is exercised.
>
> Pseudo atomicity is the only way to extend the instruction set so that one can encode atomic activities that require more than 2 unique memory references and some bookeeping instructions between the starting of the atomic event and the completion thereof.
>
> Mitch

I believe that I have just discovered a way to prove your statement wrong.

Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Pseudo-atomic - atomic operations that can fail "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-03-06 20:23 -0800
  Re: Pseudo-atomic - atomic operations that can fail MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-03-07 09:59 -0800
    Re: Pseudo-atomic - atomic operations that can fail "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-03-07 22:51 -0800
      Re: Pseudo-atomic - atomic operations that can fail MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-03-08 11:09 -0800
        Re: Pseudo-atomic - atomic operations that can fail "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-03-08 17:14 -0800

csiph-web