Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming.threads > #384
| From | Edek <edek.pienkowski@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.programming.threads |
| Subject | Re: C++0x, 29.3 p13 "[...] atomic stores visible [...] within a reasonableamount of time." |
| Date | 2011-07-05 11:36 +0200 |
| Organization | ATMAN - ATM S.A. |
| Message-ID | <iuulr4$586$1@node2.news.atman.pl> (permalink) |
| References | <3c50710c-c220-4697-91a7-49b6dc304782@r33g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <4E08D22D.7EB751FB@web.de> <9eceabc4-b9fb-49e3-a917-6986ee00a33e@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com> <iun14p$v3c$1@node2.news.atman.pl> <4E12C76D.14571224@web.de> |
My understanding is not _that_ shallow. >>> C++0x, 29.3 p13. In draft n3242, the exact text is: >>> "Implementations should make atomic stores visible to atomic loads >>> within a reasonable amount of time." >>> >> >> If you have the time, this point somehow interests me a lot. >> >> To start: does it apply to relaxed only? > > It applies to all stores. Different question: are any stores with a guarantee of better immediacy? > >> >> The main question: Does it apply to release > > Yes. > >> (and acquire/consume)? > > There are no acquire/consume stores. Thread1: store, Thread2: consume. For me these two are a pair; of course these are not stores, these are the points where the store should be visible. > >> (I am ignoring other orderings on purpose, as irrelevant for >> release/acquire, or consume, pair) >> >> What I am basically wondering about, is how to release a lock >> (or anything else blocking another thread) >> in a way that assures it is done 'now' [1]; I care more > > Simply do a store or RMW. The lock acquiring thread will perform an RMW > attempting to acquire the lock. Again: which memory ordering should I use to make a store which will be visible sooner than "within a reasonable amount of time", and which load will see this? Locked RMW on x86_64 will work, but that's not the point. > > regards, > alexander. Thanks, Edek
Back to comp.programming.threads | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: C++0x, 29.3 p13 "[...] atomic stores visible [...] within a reasonable amount of time." Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-06-27 20:55 +0200
Re: C++0x, 29.3 p13 "[...] atomic stores visible [...] within a reasonable amount of time." Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-07-01 04:06 -0700
Re: C++0x, 29.3 p13 "[...] atomic stores visible [...] within a reasonable amount of time." Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-07-01 17:35 +0200
Re: C++0x, 29.3 p13 "[...] atomic stores visible [...] within a reasonable amount of time." Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-07-01 15:23 -0700
Re: C++0x, 29.3 p13 "[...] atomic stores visible [...] within a reasonable amount of time." Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-07-02 10:18 +0200
Re: C++0x, 29.3 p13 "[...] atomic stores visible [...] within a reasonable amount of time." Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-07-05 15:10 -0700
Re: C++0x, 29.3 p13 "[...] atomic stores visible [...] within a reasonable amount of time." Edek <edek.pienkowski@gmail.com> - 2011-07-02 13:59 +0200
Re: C++0x, 29.3 p13 "[...] atomic stores visible [...] within a reasonableamount of time." Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> - 2011-07-05 10:12 +0200
Re: C++0x, 29.3 p13 "[...] atomic stores visible [...] within a reasonableamount of time." Edek <edek.pienkowski@gmail.com> - 2011-07-05 11:36 +0200
csiph-web