https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116662
--- Comment #5 from Levi Zim <rsworktech at outlook dot com> --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Any use of std::hardware_destructive_interference_size and > std::hardware_constructive_interference_size for ABI purposes in a header > file is very much discouraged and GCC will (or should be) warn about them . > > So the value is not wrong just needs improvement. I don't think so. I think it should be set to the largest possible value of L1 cache line size. If not, then how does it fulfill the requirement "Minimum offset between two objects to avoid false sharing."? As documented in https://github.com/riscv/riscv-profiles/releases/download/v1.0/profiles.pdf For RVA20*64 profiles, this value should be set to 128, taken from page 12, Za128rs. For RVA22*64 profiles, this value should be set to 64, taken from page 17, Za64rs.
