On Tue, 13 Oct 2026 22:11:21 +0100 Marat Khalili <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I am not a language lawyer, but what I read is that C11 atomic fence > > is defined to only guarantee ordering of atomic objects. Since the use > > counter is not atomic in the original code, the replacement with > > rte_atomic_thread_fence() is not the same as original asm. > > > > My patch made these atomic and that is why. > > > > Should have no impact in datapath. > > > > I will respin with better human oriented comments, I have developed > > a distaste for AI prose. Reads like a lawyer wrote it. > Just a small clarification: `use` is currently declared as atomic in > main, so all simple reads and writes to it are seq_cst atomic (and > simple increment is a pair of two seq_cst atomic operations). Right and non-atomic access to a variable declared as type _Atomic is not allowed by standard and several compilers complain about it.
