On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 15:06 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Tests passing, bootstrap in progress. > > > > Comments? > > Do you really imply ACQUIRE/RELEASE with HLE_ACQUIRE/RELEASE now? I don't > see that in the code. I think that's really required, otherwise the optimizer > will do the wrong thing and move memory references outside the region.
Perhaps HLE_ACQUIRE / HLE_RELEASE should be something like HLE_START / HLE_END instead? Not particularly great names, but at least it avoids overloading ACQUIRE/RELEASE and thus should make it clearer that you still need to specify a memory order. I agree with Jakub that users really should specify memory order bits, if they want ordering. Andi, I also see your point regarding catching bugs, but this is really expert stuff, and my hope is that we can make HLE really transparent or at least provide better abstractions around it (than to just offer the plain GCC builtins). Torvald
