http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51798
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-01-27 09:33:11 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) > Any code that explicitly calls __sync_* in > libstdc++-v3 has introduced a performance regression. But if it happens in code that is executed only rarely (e.g. the EH code will be dominated by time spent in the unwinder, not any barriers), then it might not be even measurable. So I think we should first change atomicity.h and only if you can come up with a testcase which shows a significant regression for the libsupc++ or parallel bits, we should change those too at this point. We are in stage4.
