06.10.2014, 17:42, Andres Freund kirjoitti:
> I think we can pretty much apply Oskari's patch after replacing
> acquire/release with read/write intrinsics.
Attached a patch rebased to current master using read & write barriers.
/ Oskari
From a994c0f4feff74050ade183ec26d726397fa14a7 Mon Sep 17 00:
On 2014-10-06 11:38:47 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> Also, I pretty much designed those definitions to match what Linux
> >> does. And it doesn't require that either, though it says that in most
> >> cases it will work out that way.
> >
> >
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Also, I pretty much designed those definitions to match what Linux
>> does. And it doesn't require that either, though it says that in most
>> cases it will work out that way.
>
> My point is that that read barriers aren't particularly meani
On 2014-10-02 11:35:32 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> > Which is why these acquire/release fences, in contrast to
> >> > acquire/release operations, have more guarantees... You put your finger
> >> > right onto the spot.
> >>
> >> But, uh, we
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> So let's use those, then.
>
> Right, I've never contended that.
OK, cool.
>> A fully barrier on x86 should be an mfence, right?
>
> Right. I've not talked about changing full barrier semantics. What I was
> referring to is that until the a
On 2014-10-02 10:55:06 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > It's actually more complex than that :(
> >
> > Simple things first:
> >
> > Oracle's definition seems pretty iron clad:
> > http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E18659_01/html/821-1383/gjzmf.html
> >
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> It's actually more complex than that :(
>
> Simple things first:
>
> Oracle's definition seems pretty iron clad:
> http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E18659_01/html/821-1383/gjzmf.html
> __machine_acq_barrier is a clear superset of __machine_r_barrier
On 2014-09-26 10:28:21 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Oskari Saarenmaa wrote:
> >> So you think a read barrier is the same thing as an acquire barrier
> >> and a write barrier is the same as a release barrier? That would be
> >> surprising. It's certainly not true i
26.09.2014, 17:28, Robert Haas kirjoitti:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Oskari Saarenmaa wrote:
So you think a read barrier is the same thing as an acquire barrier
and a write barrier is the same as a release barrier? That would be
surprising. It's certainly not true in general.
The abov
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Oskari Saarenmaa wrote:
>> So you think a read barrier is the same thing as an acquire barrier
>> and a write barrier is the same as a release barrier? That would be
>> surprising. It's certainly not true in general.
>
> The above doc describes the difference: re
On 2014-09-26 08:39:38 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Oskari Saarenmaa wrote:
> > 25.09.2014, 16:34, Andres Freund kirjoitti:
> >> Binaries compiled on solaris using sun studio cc currently don't have
> >> compiler and memory barriers implemented. That means we fall b
26.09.2014, 15:39, Robert Haas kirjoitti:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Oskari Saarenmaa wrote:
25.09.2014, 16:34, Andres Freund kirjoitti:
Binaries compiled on solaris using sun studio cc currently don't have
compiler and memory barriers implemented. That means we fall back to
relatively s
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Oskari Saarenmaa wrote:
> 25.09.2014, 16:34, Andres Freund kirjoitti:
>> Binaries compiled on solaris using sun studio cc currently don't have
>> compiler and memory barriers implemented. That means we fall back to
>> relatively slow generic implementations for tho
25.09.2014, 16:34, Andres Freund kirjoitti:
Binaries compiled on solaris using sun studio cc currently don't have
compiler and memory barriers implemented. That means we fall back to
relatively slow generic implementations for those. Especially compiler,
read, write barriers will be much slower t
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Binaries compiled on solaris using sun studio cc currently don't have
> compiler and memory barriers implemented. That means we fall back to
> relatively slow generic implementations for those. Especially compiler,
> read, write barriers will
15 matches
Mail list logo
