On Fri, 28 Feb 2025, Martin Uecker via Gcc wrote:
> > I have one follow-up question: What is the reason > that we have stronger semantics for stores by default (i.e. > when not using -fallow-store-data-races) than for reads > given that the standard would allow more freedom. Why would it? On the contrary, it makes an explicit note that introducing new writes that could create a racing store is not allowed, see note 13 in C11 5.1.2.4. > Only that for reads this is more difficult to have? > Or other specific reasons why data races for stores > are problematic? Introducing racing loads is generally not harmful, see note 14. Alexander
