On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 01:27:51AM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote: > > Initial state: x == y == 0 > > > > T1: r1 = atomic_load_explicit(x, memory_order_relaxed); > > atomic_store_explicit(42, y, memory_order_relaxed); > > if (r1 != 42) > > atomic_store_explicit(r1, y, memory_order_relaxed); > > > > T2: r2 = atomic_load_explicit(y, memory_order_relaxed); > > atomic_store_explicit(r2, x, memory_order_relaxed); > > Intuitively, this is wrong because this let's the program take a step > the abstract machine wouldn't do. This is different to the sequential > code that Peter posted because it uses atomics, and thus one can't > easily assume that the difference is not observable.
Yeah, my bad for not being familiar with the atrocious crap C11 made of atomics :/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
