Notice the store of *after* the store to . I consider
this a bug and have put this on my laundry list.
Seems plausible, though I don't know the details of the x86_64 memory
model well enough to be sure that it would be possible to observe this
reordering. But then, if your test fails I guess it
On 04/04/2011 01:11 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
1. Synchronized atomic load/stores:
atomic_int atomi;
long double j;
Thread 1:
j = 13.0;
atomi.store(1);
Thread 2:
atomi.load();
As I understand it, the load/stores have acquire/release semantics,
so the store to must happen before the store to .
