[Bug other/24757] __sync_fetch_and_add on ia64
--- Comment #5 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-11-09 19:30 --- Some additional details from testresults: the bulk of the builtin atomics changes went in around mid of April, the ia64 specific bits, on April, 14. All the results that Andreas sent at the beginning of the month (for instance april, 7, 8, 9) are fine. Then, at the end of the month (for instance, april, 22, 23, 24) the results are not clean anymore. Lately, never less than 2 failures, often 4, in threading tests. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24757
[Bug other/24757] __sync_fetch_and_add on ia64
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-11-09 17:51 --- (In reply to comment #3) > .Alternately, the ia64 builtins > themselves can be defective, but that seems much less likely to me, because > we are talking about a very consistent behavior for relatively simple usages > of one single mutex and one single atomic counter. And this is also inconsistent with 4_0-branch, where we have no problems, never during the last 6 months, at least. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24757
[Bug other/24757] __sync_fetch_and_add on ia64
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-11-09 17:45 --- (In reply to comment #2) > Hmm you said in: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2005-11/msg00149.html > > That was really a glibc bug. Exactly *was*. Ehi, do you think I'm stupid? Of course in the meanwhile I have checked that the problem is present in machines equipped with glibc2.3.5 and is not, on the same machines, for 4_0-branch. > And actually 4.0 and before uses the builtins for ia64, this is where the > builtins came from in the first place. Exactly. But, given the glibc bug above, masking the gcc behavior well into 2005 for some of our machines, at least, isn't possible that when we switched to builtins everywhere something got broken? Alternately, the ia64 builtins themselves can be defective, but that seems much less likely to me, because we are talking about a very consistent behavior for relatively simple usages of one single mutex and one single atomic counter. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24757
[Bug other/24757] __sync_fetch_and_add on ia64
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-09 17:35 --- Hmm you said in: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2005-11/msg00149.html That was really a glibc bug. And actually 4.0 and before uses the builtins for ia64, this is where the builtins came from in the first place. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24757
[Bug other/24757] __sync_fetch_and_add on ia64
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-11-09 17:00 --- (In reply to comment #0) > Those tests *never* fail in 4_0-branch, which doesn't use the builtins, and > never did in mainline before the below of mine (and a simultaneous one to > the compiler, which emptied ia64intrin.h) Whereas it *is* true that those tests never fail in 4_0-branch, the second part is not strictly true: sometimes, in mainline the tests failed also before that date. I would say, much less consistently. This is all I know, for now. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24757
