On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 05:43:02AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> Lack of libatomic is increasingly hard to deal with. This library
> implements function calls for atomic operations.
I'm sure you have done the research on why the existing arguments
against providing libatomic are wrong. For some
On 07.05.2020 21:45, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 05:43:02AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> Lack of libatomic is increasingly hard to deal with. This library
>> implements function calls for atomic operations.
>
> I'm sure you have done the research on why the existing ar
On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 10:13:30PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> On 07.05.2020 21:45, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 05:43:02AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> >> Lack of libatomic is increasingly hard to deal with. This library
> >> implements function calls for atomic o
On 07.05.2020 22:45, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 10:13:30PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> On 07.05.2020 21:45, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 05:43:02AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
Lack of libatomic is increasingly hard to deal with. This l
I am under the impression that (at least GCC) compilers will not emit
intrinsic calls if they are guaranteed to be available on the target.
This means libatomic needs to:
- Optimize: we can runtime detect, which emitted code cannot do.
Note that this means providing this libatomic will cause us
On 08.05.2020 00:49, m...@netbsd.org wrote:
> I am under the impression that (at least GCC) compilers will not emit
> intrinsic calls if they are guaranteed to be available on the target.
>
> This means libatomic needs to:
>
> - Optimize: we can runtime detect, which emitted code cannot do.
>
>
On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 01:51:16AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> A runtime detection could be a part of ifunc (is it ready for NetBSD?).
>
> The standard C/C++ feature is to detect whether atomic operations are
> real (lock-free) through atomic_is_lock_free(). This is a feature, not a
> bug (as
On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 08:14:57PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 01:51:16AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> > A runtime detection could be a part of ifunc (is it ready for NetBSD?).
> >
> > The standard C/C++ feature is to detect whether atomic operations are
> > rea
