On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 1:39 PM Joseph Seigh wrote:
>
> rseq? The concept seems vaguely familiar. :)
Yes, I meant mostly that it can now be played with easily and used in
production.
> Might not get past POC w/ smrproxy. The idea was to write portable code
> using c11/c17 atomics but I don't thing that's possible given how borked its
> memory model semantics are. And I mean even more borked than their
> discussions of what they think the memory model problems are. And I really
> don't feel like writing non portable inline assembly just to ensure the code
> is doing what it should be doing.
>
> Joe Seigh
>
> --
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Scalable Synchronization Algorithms" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to lock-free+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lock-free/ae8349fc-a322-421f-8acd-9a8c4aa3a32an%40googlegroups.com.
--
Dmitry Vyukov
All about lockfree/waitfree algorithms, multicore, scalability,
parallel computing and related topics:
http://www.1024cores.net
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Scalable Synchronization Algorithms" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to lock-free+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lock-free/CAEeQi3t%2BFP3Ujb%2BKugHSc8qcjSYowmwKVh0xXiY2YK3Y8vR3Zg%40mail.gmail.com.
