Ingo Oeser wrote:
>Hi Tim,
>
>On Sun, May 12, 2002 at 12:24:57PM +0200, Tim Goetze wrote:
>> nevertheless, i went looking at the other archs and very much to my
>> surprise found corresponding code for ppc and sparc for example. to
>> my surprise because i assume it to be unused, otherwise there'
Hi Tim,
On Sun, May 12, 2002 at 12:24:57PM +0200, Tim Goetze wrote:
> nevertheless, i went looking at the other archs and very much to my
> surprise found corresponding code for ppc and sparc for example. to
> my surprise because i assume it to be unused, otherwise there'd be an
> implementation
Ingo Oeser wrote:
>Hi Tim,
>
>On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 03:51:09PM +0200, Tim Goetze wrote:
>> i'm evaluating the following construct to implement a lock-free fifo
>> that allows more than one thread on the writer side:
>>
>> here, the i386 'xadd' instruction atomically adds 'i' to the counter
>>
Hi Tim,
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 03:51:09PM +0200, Tim Goetze wrote:
> i'm evaluating the following construct to implement a lock-free fifo
> that allows more than one thread on the writer side:
>
> here, the i386 'xadd' instruction atomically adds 'i' to the counter
> variable and returns the co
hello all,
i'm evaluating the following construct to implement a lock-free fifo
that allows more than one thread on the writer side:
inline int return_and_add (int i = 1)
{
register int j asm ("eax") = i;
/* the lock prefix is not strictly needed on
* single-p
