On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Johannes Sixt <j...@kdbg.org> wrote: >> >> Sigh. DCLP, the Double Checked Locking Pattern. These days, it should be >> common knowledge among professionals that this naïve version _does_not_work_ >> [1]! >> >> I suggest you go without it, then measure, and only *then* optimize if it is >> a bottleneck. Did I read "we do not expect much contention" somewhere? >> >> [1] http://www.aristeia.com/Papers/DDJ_Jul_Aug_2004_revised.pdf C++ centric, >> but applies to C just as well >> >> -- Hannes >> > > > You know, I always wondered why Linux Kernel code needed memory > barriers but userspace programs didn't seem to use them.. turns out > they actually *do* need them for the same exact types of problems... > > Thanks, > Jake
In a former job I made use of them, too. So I am kinda embarrassed. (I cannot claim I did not know about these patterns and memory fencing, it just escaped my consciousness).
