[Bug libstdc++/115955] atomic::wait _S_for uses a poor hash function

2025-05-30 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115955 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1) > Yes, this is a known limitation that will get fixed with the planned > refactoring of atomic::wait. The function that maps an address to a mutex has been mo

[Bug libstdc++/115955] atomic::wait _S_for uses a poor hash function

2025-02-20 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115955 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|15.0|16.0

[Bug libstdc++/115955] atomic::wait _S_for uses a poor hash function

2025-01-10 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115955 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- std::barrier does: std::hash __hasher; size_t __current = __hasher(std::this_thread::get_id()); Maybe this could be improved too, although it doesn't have exactly the same issue (not all

[Bug libstdc++/115955] atomic::wait _S_for uses a poor hash function

2025-01-10 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115955 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2024-07-16 00:00:00 |2025-1-10 Assignee|unassign

[Bug libstdc++/115955] atomic::wait _S_for uses a poor hash function

2024-07-16 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115955 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|