On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 07:17:32PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > Are you planning to apply the fix?
Yes, I'll take care of it. >> I'd ordinarily suggest removing this section of code since it doesn't seem >> to have gotten much coverage > > Which section precisely? The lines below this: /* * provide fallback for test_and_set using atomic_exchange if available */ #if !defined(PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_TEST_SET_FLAG) && defined(PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_EXCHANGE_U32) but above this: /* * provide fallback for test_and_set using atomic_compare_exchange if * available. */ #elif !defined(PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_TEST_SET_FLAG) && defined(PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_COMPARE_EXCHANGE_U32) >> but I'm actually looking into adding some faster atomic-exchange >> implementations that may activate this code for certain >> compiler/architecture combinations. > > Hm. I don't really see how adding a faster atomic-exchange implementation > could trigger this implementation being used? That'd define PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_EXCHANGE_U32, so this fallback might be used if PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_TEST_SET_FLAG is not defined. I haven't traced through all the #ifdefs that lead to this point exhaustively, though, so perhaps this is still unlikely. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com