http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56028
--- Comment #8 from Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-19 12:35:12 UTC ---
Indeed, different hardware implementations can cause all sorts of mischief.
Nevertheless, the compiler should not also provide mischief in these cases.
In addition, as not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56028
--- Comment #6 from Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-18 17:40:13 UTC ---
The fact that a data-race-free program cannot observe the non-atomicity of a
64-bit store, though true, is beside the point. The plain fact is that
hardware registers (for w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56028
--- Comment #4 from Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-18 16:22:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> So, what are these "rules of the abstract machine", and why do they allow
> non-atomic store of a large volatile aggregate (it is definitely not at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56028
--- Comment #2 from Paul E. McKenney
2013-01-18 11:25:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> - Does language standard guarantee atomic store in this case [wikipedia says
> "No." [1]]?
The above example of device drivers storing constants
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55981
Paul E. McKenney changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paulmck at linux dot
