Please find a proposed patch for _Sp_counted_base::_M_release to skip the
two atomic instructions that decrement each of the use count and the weak
count when both are 1. I proposed the general idea in an earlier thread (
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2020-December/051642.html) and got
us
Please let me know if more information about this patch is needed. Thank
you.
Maged
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 3:49 PM Maged Michael
wrote:
> Please find a proposed patch for _Sp_counted_base::_M_release to skip the
> two atomic instructions that decrement each of the use count and the weak
> co
Please find attached an updated patch after incorporating Jonathan's
suggestions.
Changes from the last patch include:
- Add a TSAN macro to bits/c++config.
- Use separate constexpr bool-s for the conditions for lock-freedom,
double-width and alignment.
- Move the code in the optimized path to a s
This is the right patch. The previous one is missing noexcept. Sorry.
On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 9:23 AM Maged Michael
wrote:
> Please find attached an updated patch after incorporating Jonathan's
> suggestions.
>
> Changes from the last patch include:
> - Add a TSAN macro to bits/c++config.
> - Us
On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 at 14:29, Maged Michael wrote:
>
> This is the right patch. The previous one is missing noexcept. Sorry.
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 9:23 AM Maged Michael wrote:
>>
>> Please find attached an updated patch after incorporating Jonathan's
>> suggestions.
>>
>> Changes from the l
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 21:59, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 at 14:29, Maged Michael wrote:
> >
> > This is the right patch. The previous one is missing noexcept. Sorry.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 9:23 AM Maged Michael
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Please find attached an updated pat
Thanks, Jonathan!
On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 11:32 AM Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 21:59, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 at 14:29, Maged Michael wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the right patch. The previous one is missing noexcept. Sorry.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug
On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 16:47, Maged Michael wrote:
>
> Thanks, Jonathan!
>
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 11:32 AM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 21:59, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 at 14:29, Maged Michael wrote:
>> > >
>> > > This is the right patch. The previ
Sorry. I totally missed the rest of your message and the patch. My fuzzy
eyesight, which usually guesses correctly 90% of the time, mistook
"Secondly" on a line by itself for "Sincerely" :-)
On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 11:32 AM Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 21:59, Jonathan Wakely wro
On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 1:19 PM Maged Michael
wrote:
> Sorry. I totally missed the rest of your message and the patch. My fuzzy
> eyesight, which usually guesses correctly 90% of the time, mistook
> "Secondly" on a line by itself for "Sincerely" :-)
>
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 11:32 AM Jonathan Wak
On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 18:19, Maged Michael wrote:
>
> Sorry. I totally missed the rest of your message and the patch. My fuzzy
> eyesight, which usually guesses correctly 90% of the time, mistook "Secondly"
> on a line by itself for "Sincerely" :-)
:-)
> The noinlining was based on looking at g
On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 3:32 PM Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 18:19, Maged Michael wrote:
> >
> > Sorry. I totally missed the rest of your message and the patch. My fuzzy
> eyesight, which usually guesses correctly 90% of the time, mistook
> "Secondly" on a line by itself for "Sin
On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 20:51, Maged Michael wrote:
>
> Please find a proposed patch for _Sp_counted_base::_M_release to skip the
> two atomic instructions that decrement each of the use count and the weak
> count when both are 1. I proposed the general idea in an earlier thread (
> https://gcc.gnu.
Thank you, Jonathan, for the detailed comments! I'll update the patch
accordingly.
On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 9:55 AM Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 20:51, Maged Michael wrote:
> >
> > Please find a proposed patch for _Sp_counted_base::_M_release to skip the
> > two atomic instruct
I've pushed this change to trunk now (it was posted and reviewed in
stage 1, I just didn't get around to pushing it until now).
The final version of the patch is attached to this mail.
Thanks for the nice optimization, Maged!
On Wed, 4 Aug 2021 at 20:49, Maged Michael via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
>
Hi Jonathan,
> I've pushed this change to trunk now (it was posted and reviewed in
> stage 1, I just didn't get around to pushing it until now).
>
> The final version of the patch is attached to this mail.
unfortunately, it breaks Solaris/SPARC bootstrap:
In file included from
/var/gcc/regressi
On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 at 19:17, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> > I've pushed this change to trunk now (it was posted and reviewed in
> > stage 1, I just didn't get around to pushing it until now).
> >
> > The final version of the patch is attached to this mail.
>
> unfortunately, it breaks So
On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 at 19:21, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 at 19:17, Rainer Orth wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jonathan,
> >
> > > I've pushed this change to trunk now (it was posted and reviewed in
> > > stage 1, I just didn't get around to pushing it until now).
> > >
> > > The final version
Would appreciate any comments on this proposed patch.
Thanks,
Maged
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 3:49 PM Maged Michael
wrote:
> Please find a proposed patch for _Sp_counted_base::_M_release to skip the
> two atomic instructions that decrement each of the use count and the weak
> count when both are
19 matches
Mail list logo
