On Mon, 17 May 2021 at 01:29, Tatsuo Ishii <is...@sraoss.co.jp> wrote: > Yes, we'd better to fix them. Attached is a propsal for these.
Thanks for working on that. I had a look and wondered if it might be better to go into slightly less details about the exact atomic function to use. The wording there might lead you to believe you can just call the atomic function on the non-atomic variable. It might be best just to leave the details about how exactly to use atomics by just referencing port/atomics.h. Maybe something like the attached? I'm also a bit on the fence if this should be backpatched or not. The reasons though maybe not is that it seems unlikely maybe people would not be working in master if they're developing something new. On the other side of the argument, 0ccebe779, which adjusts another README was backpatched. I'm leaning towards backpatching. David
README.barrier_v3.patch
Description: Binary data
