On Sun, 10 Sep 2017 09:40:09 -0700, Charles Mills ([email protected]) wrote about "CSST question" (in <[email protected]>):
[snip] > Is that saying that there is a chance that another CPU might observe a > condition in which the store of the first operand had occurred, but the > store of the second operand had not? My understanding from earlier > paragraphs was that CSST happened "all at once" from the point of view of > other CPUs. Was I mistaken? My reading of PoOps is that CSST is guaranteed to be atomic, just like the other instructions in the compare-and-swap family. So your first understanding is correct. -- Regards, Dave [RLU #314465] *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* [email protected] (David W Noon) *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
