On Mar 11, 2015, at 11:38 AM, Oleg Smolsky <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2015-03-10 15:31, Howard Hinnant wrote: >> On Mar 7, 2015, at 11:06 PM, Oleg Smolsky <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi there, I reported a TSan issue that resulted in the following bug report >>> against libc++: >>> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22836 >>> >>> Could you folks take a look at the following (intuitive) patch please? >>> http://reviews.llvm.org/D8147 >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Oleg. >> Can the increment be relaxed? >> >> http://stackoverflow.com/q/28199212/576911 >> >> > Hi Howard, my understanding is that the increment path can become: > > __shared_owners_.fetch_add(1, std::memory_order_acquire); > > BTW, does that make any difference on x86-64?
My question was asked in ignorance except that I knew the SO question existed, and I’ve watched the link it has. I haven’t investigated my question at all, and don’t know the answer, sorry. Howard _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
