On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 07:44:32PM +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> [email protected]
> X-Xagent-Gateway: bldgate.vnet.ibm.com (XAGSMTP3 at BLDGATE)
>
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 10:11 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > But yes, the compiler guys would be extremely happy to simply drop
> > memory_order_consume from the standard, as it is the memory order
> > that they most love to hate.
> >
> > Getting them to agree to any sort of peep-hole optimization semantics
> > for memory_order_consume is likely problematic.
>
> I wouldn't be so pessimistic about that. If the transformations can be
> shown to be always correct in terms of the semantics specified in the
> standard, and if the performance win is sufficiently large, why not? Of
> course, somebody has to volunteer to actually implement it :)
I guess that there is only one way to find out. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
