[Bug target/80640] Missing memory side effect with __atomic_thread_fence (2)

2022-03-14 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tomash.brechko at gmail dot com ---

[Bug target/80640] Missing memory side effect with __atomic_thread_fence (2)

2022-03-14 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.0

[Bug target/80640] Missing memory side effect with __atomic_thread_fence (2)

2017-10-20 Thread torvald at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640 torvald at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||torvald at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/80640] Missing memory side effect with __atomic_thread_fence (2)

2017-09-13 Thread aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640 --- Comment #10 from Aldy Hernandez --- Author: aldyh Date: Wed Sep 13 17:32:07 2017 New Revision: 252586 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=252586=gcc=rev Log: optabs: ensure mem_thread_fence is a compiler barrier PR target/80640

[Bug target/80640] Missing memory side effect with __atomic_thread_fence (2)

2017-08-28 Thread amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/80640] Missing memory side effect with __atomic_thread_fence (2)

2017-08-28 Thread amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640 --- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov --- Author: amonakov Date: Mon Aug 28 10:58:45 2017 New Revision: 251377 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251377=gcc=rev Log: optabs: ensure mem_thread_fence is a compiler barrier PR

[Bug target/80640] Missing memory side effect with __atomic_thread_fence (2)

2017-05-10 Thread amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80640 --- Comment #7 from Alexander Monakov --- I've submitted a patch [1] for the missing compiler barrier, but however please note that the original ompi code and the example in comment #3 are wrong: in a pattern like while (*foo)