That is what I would prefer. I was trying to not disturb things too
much :). Please bring the changes over!

-Nathan

On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 03:18:44PM -0400, George Bosilca wrote:
>    Why do you want to add new versions? This will lead to having two, almost
>    identical, sets of atomics that are conceptually equivalent but different
>    in terms of code. And we will have to maintained both!
>    I did a similar change in a fork of OPAL in another project but instead of
>    adding another flavor of atomics, I completely replaced the available ones
>    with a set returning the old value. I can bring the code over.
>      George.
> 
>    On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Paul Hargrove <phhargr...@lbl.gov> wrote:
> 
>      On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Nathan Hjelm <hje...@lanl.gov> wrote:
> 
>        Is there a reason why the
>        current implementations of opal atomics (add, cmpset) do not return
>        the
>        old value?
> 
>      Because some CPUs don't implement such an atomic instruction?
> 
>      On any CPU one *can* certainly synthesize the desired operation with an
>      added read before the compare-and-swap to return a value that was
>      present at some time before a failed cmpset.  That is almost certainly
>      sufficient for your purposes.  However, the added load makes it
>      (marginally) more expensive on some CPUs that only have the native
>      equivalent of gcc's __sync_bool_compare_and_swap().
> 
>      -Paul
>      --
>      Paul H. Hargrove                          phhargr...@lbl.gov
>      Future Technologies Group
>      Computer and Data Sciences Department     Tel: +1-510-495-2352
>      Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory     Fax: +1-510-486-6900
>      _______________________________________________
>      devel mailing list
>      de...@open-mpi.org
>      Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>      Link to this post:
>      http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/07/15328.php

> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org
> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> Link to this post: 
> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/07/15369.php

Attachment: pgpUHSVoeg0RH.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to