Re: [lttng-dev] liburcu: LTO breaking rcu_dereference on arm64 and possibly other architectures ?

2021-04-19 Thread Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
- On Apr 19, 2021, at 11:41 AM, Duncan Sands baldr...@free.fr wrote: > Hi Mathieu, > > On 4/19/21 5:31 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: >> - On Apr 19, 2021, at 5:41 AM, Duncan Sands baldr...@free.fr wrote: >> >> >>> Quick question: should we use __atomic_load() or

Re: [lttng-dev] liburcu: LTO breaking rcu_dereference on arm64 and possibly other architectures ?

2021-04-19 Thread Duncan Sands via lttng-dev
Hi Mathieu, On 4/19/21 5:31 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: - On Apr 19, 2021, at 5:41 AM, Duncan Sands baldr...@free.fr wrote: Quick question: should we use __atomic_load() or atomic_load_explicit() (C) and (std::atomic<__typeof__(x)>)(x)).load() (C++) ? If both are available, is there

Re: [lttng-dev] liburcu: LTO breaking rcu_dereference on arm64 and possibly other architectures ?

2021-04-19 Thread Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
- On Apr 19, 2021, at 5:41 AM, Duncan Sands baldr...@free.fr wrote: > >> Quick question: should we use __atomic_load() or atomic_load_explicit() (C) >> and >> (std::atomic<__typeof__(x)>)(x)).load() (C++) ? > > If both are available, is there any advantage to using the C++ version when >