* Martin Uecker via Gcc: > It would be great if somebody could take a look at > PR96159. > > It seems we do not do atomic accesses correctly > when the alignment is insufficient for a lockfree > access, but I think we should fall back to a > library call in this case (as clang does). > > This is very unfortunate as it is an important > functionality to be able to do atomic accesses > on non-atomic types and it seems there is no way > to achieve this.
GCC should probably warn about this, and ensure that objects declared _Atomic have increased alignment. But adding run-time checks to all atomic accesses does not make sense. We want to move user code away from bespoke atomics implementations, and this would be contrary to that goal. Thanks, Florian
