jyknight added a subscriber: jyknight. jyknight added a comment. This conflicts with http://reviews.llvm.org/D17933. Most of this change also seems unnecessary.
- I think the `is_always_lock_free` function should be defined based on the existing `__atomic_always_lock_free` builtin, not on defines (just like is_lock_free uses `__atomic_is_lock_free`, or `__c11_atomic_is_lock_free`, which is effectively an alias). - Then, the new `__GCC_ATOMIC_DOUBLE_LOCK_FREE` macros are unnecessary, unless we need to actually define a `ATOMIC_DOUBLE_LOCK_FREE` macro. - `__LLVM_ATOMIC_1_BYTES_LOCK_FREE` effectively duplicates `__GCC_HAVE_SYNC_COMPARE_AND_SWAP_1`, so aren't needed. http://reviews.llvm.org/D17950 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
