Groups > comp.programming.threads > #424

Re: Interlocked operations, volatile

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de>
Newsgroups	comp.programming.threads
Subject	Re: Interlocked operations, volatile
Date	Wed, 13 Jul 2011 20:03:01 +0200
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	42
Message-ID	<4E1DDDD5.AA6B4306@web.de> (permalink)
References	<99a57186-cf9f-47ee-8955-07df1ce2b126@b21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
Reply-To	terekhov@web.de
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
Injection-Info	mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="MCbSEzW5qwGLFMNXJh39IQ"; logging-data="15858"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19ETkYvI0c4JV1YHqbshuDcoWGHzHN2tOc="
X-Mailer	Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language	en
Cancel-Lock	sha1:eJmT3OA/TnkY60mOBclA7Gh22RU=
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.programming.threads:424

Show key headers only | View raw

Andrew Che wrote:
> 
> Greetings!
> 
> Q1: Is it true that the only goal of using interlocked operations is
> to guarantee that read/write operations are completed in proper order?

Not true.

> Q2: Is it true that the goal of 'volatile' is the same?

Not true.

> Q3: Is it nessesary to use 'int* volatile ptr' or some interlocked
> operation in line [???] to be sure function2 is correct (see sample
> below)?

Not necessary.

> 
> == START SAMPLE ==
> 
> int value = 42;
> int* ptr = 0;
> 
> void function1 () { // called from many threads
>         cas(&ptr, &value, 0); // some compare-and-swap function
> }
> 
> void function2 () { // called from many threads
>         if(!ptr) { // [???]
>                 return;
>         some_func(ptr);
> }
> == END SAMPLE ==
> 
> Cheers,
> Andrew

regards,
alexander.

Thread

Interlocked operations, volatile Andrew Che <libera.ventis@gmail.com> - 2011-07-13 09:43 -0700
  Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-07-13 20:03 +0200
  Re: Interlocked operations, volatile David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-07-13 15:24 -0700
    Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Andrew Che <libera.ventis@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 00:13 -0700
    Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Andrew Che <libera.ventis@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 00:17 -0700
    Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Andrew Che <libera.ventis@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 00:37 -0700
    Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Andrew Che <libera.ventis@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 00:41 -0700
    Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Andrew Che <libera.ventis@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 00:44 -0700
    Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Andrew Che <libera.ventis@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 00:31 -0700
    Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Andrew Che <libera.ventis@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 00:52 -0700
      Re: Interlocked operations, volatile David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-07-14 03:06 -0700
        Re: Interlocked operations, volatile David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-07-14 06:16 -0700
          Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-07-14 17:20 +0200
            Re: Interlocked operations, volatile David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-07-14 09:19 -0700
          Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Andrew Che <libera.ventis@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 08:52 -0700
            Re: Interlocked operations, volatile David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-07-14 10:51 -0700
              Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-07-14 23:05 +0200
          Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Andrew Che <libera.ventis@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 08:49 -0700
    Re: Interlocked operations, volatile Andrew Che <libera.ventis@gmail.com> - 2011-07-14 00:48 -0700
  Re: Interlocked operations, volatile frege <gottlobfrege@gmail.com> - 2011-07-20 22:13 -0700

csiph-web