On 2013-01-28 12:48 AM, Brian Smith wrote:
Joshua Cranmer wrote:
In bug 732043, I want to add a mozilla::Atomic class
that lets us use C++11 atomics where available and fallback to
compiler intrinsics where C++11 atomics are not implemented
(which amounts to gcc 4.4 and Visual Studio 2010 or ear
Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> On 1/27/2013 11:48 PM, Brian Smith wrote:
> > FWIW, in cases like this, I would rather we just use the C++11 API
> > directly even if it means dropping support for common but
> > out-of-date compilers like gcc 4.4 and VS2010.
>
> I personally prefer an API style where the m
On 1/27/2013 11:48 PM, Brian Smith wrote:
Joshua Cranmer wrote:
In bug 732043, I want to add a mozilla::Atomic class
that lets us use C++11 atomics where available and fallback to
compiler intrinsics where C++11 atomics are not implemented
(which amounts to gcc 4.4 and Visual Studio 2010 or earl
Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> In bug 732043, I want to add a mozilla::Atomic class
> that lets us use C++11 atomics where available and fallback to
> compiler intrinsics where C++11 atomics are not implemented
> (which amounts to gcc 4.4 and Visual Studio 2010 or earlier).
How far are we from Visual Stu
On 12/14/12 1:48 AM, Justin Lebar wrote:
FWIW, I once tried changing all of our atomic string refcounting to
non-atomic operations and could not eke out a performance (or
stability) difference on x64. This was despite the fact that I was
able to generate profiles where the atomic string refcount
> Is code like this safe in the C++1 Unordered model?
> Thread 1:
> int x = obj->v;
> obj->Release();
> Thread 2:
> obj->Release();
> where obj's destructor trashes obj->v.
> The potential hazard is if thread 1's obj->Release() atomic decrement is
> reordered to run before the obj->v load has
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> 3. Similar to #2, the ideal version of a reference counter would be
> mozilla::Atomic (which would make threadsafe
> refcounting cheaper on our ARM platforms if we compiled with gcc 4.6 or
> clang 3.1 or newer). However, I'm not sure that n
As you may or may not be aware, one of the goodies that comes in C++11
is the introduction of an explicit memory model as well as proper
support for multithreaded code. One important piece of this is
std::atomic, which provides an interoperable way to do (potentially
lockless) atomic operations
8 matches
Mail list logo
