* Vineet Gupta:
> I agree that gcc atomics should be baseline. I would still propose to
> carry this patch as it makes code less verbose if nothing else and the
> wrappers are part of glibc already.
The advantage of the GCC built-ins is that they have easy-to-find
documentation. Our wrapper macr
On 9/9/20 3:19 AM, Florian Weimer via Libc-alpha wrote:
> * Vineet Gupta via Libc-alpha:
>
>> This came up in a nascent arc64 port, lacking gcc atomics for now
>
> Can you please change the GCC port to provide atomics instead?
Sure, they are added now.
> It does not make sense to maintain those
* Vineet Gupta via Libc-alpha:
> This came up in a nascent arc64 port, lacking gcc atomics for now
Can you please change the GCC port to provide atomics instead?
It does not make sense to maintain those atomics in many projects
separately.
Thanks,
Florian
--
Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com
This came up in a nascent arc64 port, lacking gcc atomics for now
---
support/support_record_failure.c | 15 ---
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/support/support_record_failure.c b/support/support_record_failure.c
index f766c0623683..65e576c6e901 100644
---
