Farid Zaripov wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 5:49 AM
To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use __rw_atomic_xxx() on Windows
Travis Vitek wrote:
Oh, yeah. that is the other thing that I did Friday. I wrote a
testcase to compare __rw_atomic_add32() against
InterlockedIncrement() on Win32.
There is a performance penalty...
I'd be curious to know if the performance penalty is due to
the function call overhead or something else.
In any case though, I think we could tweak the patch and
change the __rw_atomic_pre{de,in}crement() overloads for int
and long to call the appropriate Interlocked{De,In}crement()
intrinsics and have the other overloads use the new ones.
Farid, what do you think about this approach?
I agree. And I decided to make the changes above
without making the tests to see the performance penalty.
Okay, that sounds like a good approach to me. You can still
commit the int and long atomic functions, we just won't call
them.
Martin
