hrm, i'm reading your mesage a bit more closely, and i'm not sure i
understand the distinction you mean by strong vs weak.
Do you mean strong as in STM style semantics for reads and writes? (ie if
i'm doing a CAS on memory location x, it totally orders all reads and
writes to ANY location y!=x
Hi,
Am Donnerstag, den 05.12.2013, 12:15 +0100 schrieb Herbert Valerio
Riedel:
PS: I didn't merge in testsuite's Git history as that would bloat
ghc.git quite a bit;
would that really be a problem? How different are the numbers?
I’m a fan of keeping history readily available, so unless it
Hello Joachim,
On 2013-12-05 at 12:56:55 +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Am Donnerstag, den 05.12.2013, 12:15 +0100 schrieb Herbert Valerio
Riedel:
PS: I didn't merge in testsuite's Git history as that would bloat
ghc.git quite a bit;
would that really be a problem? How different are the
On 2013-12-05 at 15:17:53 +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote:
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 03:03:42PM +0100, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
However, if the testsuite/ was already checked out before the 'sync-all
pull', the 'testsuite/.git' folder won't be removed automatically (and
it shouldn't hurt either,
I'm all for converting to submodules. Since we will have submodules
anyway, we could also convert testsuite et al to submodules and see how
painful that is before deciding to fold them in to the main repo. I'm
not clear on the pros/cons of having, e.g., testsuite, as a submodule vs
folded in. The
It's strong. How to tell: x86 doesn't support really have any kind of
weak CAS implementation; and our PowerPC implementation loops over
LL/SC. (oh, and our asm is marked volatile)
As for whether or not there are any uses of CAS that don't need these
guarantees, probably the best way to figure
