Jacob Moroni schrieb:
Got it. I'll add the support to GCC's libatomic then send it in. Thanks.
Here is some introduction on contributing to GCC:
http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html
As it is hard to follow discussions in top-posting style, that style is
usually voided :-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Top-posting
On Jun 25, 2016 5:13 PM, "Joerg Wunsch" wrote:
As Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
As libatomic will need close cooperation with the compiler, I'd
recommend to add it to GCC.
That would be my recommendation, too. If it's a compile feature,
it would better be there. Perhaps it's then even possible to find
a more efficient implementation (no function call overhead).
cheers, Joerg .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL
There are quite some standard insns for atomics known to gcc, cf.
"atomic_" insns in
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Standard-Names.html
This can avoid overhead of function calls. But I still don't see the
great advantage of using stdatomic over the "classical" util/atomic.h
from avr-libc. For C++ we don't have portability because there is no
libstdc++ generated for avr, not even libsupc++...
Johann
_______________________________________________
AVR-libc-dev mailing list
AVR-libc-dev@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
