On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:30 PM, nathan binkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Another option would be to have a boolean that said if it needed to be >> atomic or not. If you knew that the object wouldn't span threads it >> wouldn't need to be set or perhaps at the point when it changed >> threads it could be set. The logic needs to be a bit better than >> atomic inc/dec since you could possibly have double free case if you >> aren't careful. > Yes, you'd need a decrement and test or something like that.
Typical atomic inc/dec semantics are that the operation returns the value immediately before or after the atomic op (really "fetch and inc/dec" is more descriptive). Steve _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
