On 12/06/15 10:30 +0100, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote:
On 11/06/15 23:56 +0200, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 12:37 +0100, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
I don't think we can remove _GLIBCXX_READ_MEM_BARRIER and
_GLIBCXX_WRITE_MEM_BARRIER from atomic_word.h even though they are
superseded by the atomics as it is published in the documentation as
available macros.
I see. We should at least update the documentation of those, as the
current one isn't a really portable specification. If we can, I'd
deprecate them. Jonathan, what do you think?
Yes, I'm in favour of deprecating them. They are GCC-specific anyway,
so there is no reason to prefer them to std::atomic_ or __atomic_
fences.
I'll treat it as a follow-up.
Sure.
Can I get an ack for this patch though ? I could backport this as is
to fix the problems on ARM / AArch64 (PR target/66200) - alternatively
I'll provide header implementations of the same for the release
branches.
Yes, OK for trunk, thanks.
I think it's safer if the backport only changes the ARM and AArch64
implementations, at least for now. If no problems are found on trunk
we could consider backporting the whole thing for all targets, but it
may not be worth it if the other targets are working OK.
