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

Groups > comp.programming.threads > #605

Re: Threads and statically allocated buffer

Show all headers | View raw

On 25-09-2011 AM 01:12, David Schwartz wrote:
> On Sep 23, 9:38 pm, ittium<itt...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> Is there any operation that is guaranteed to be atomic ?
>
> Your platform might have some.
>
>>  From your
>> reasoning it seems operations like ++a or a=b are also not atomic.
>
> Exactly. Some CPUs don't even have atomic increment operations. And
> even if the CPU does, the compiler might see that it needs the value
> later and prefer to have it in a register, so it might not use an
> atomic in-memory increment even if it has one.

You are saying even if there is some atomic operation available for some 
compiler+OS+CPU, this is not guaranteed to be portable, In other words, 
there is no portable atomic operation.

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

Thread

Threads and statically allocated buffer ittium <ittium@gmail.com> - 2011-09-22 11:47 +0530
  Re: Threads and statically allocated buffer David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-09-22 14:34 -0700
    Re: Threads and statically allocated buffer ittium <ittium@gmail.com> - 2011-09-24 10:08 +0530
      Re: Threads and statically allocated buffer David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-09-24 12:42 -0700
        Re: Threads and statically allocated buffer ittium <ittium@gmail.com> - 2011-09-25 11:45 +0530
          Re: Threads and statically allocated buffer David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-09-25 04:15 -0700
  Re: Threads and statically allocated buffer Marcel Müller <news.5.maazl@spamgourmet.com> - 2011-09-24 09:16 +0200

csiph-web