[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] atomic: using memory_order_relaxed for refcnt i
From: |
Richard Henderson |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] atomic: using memory_order_relaxed for refcnt inc/dec ops |
Date: |
Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:24:14 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 |
On 07/11/2013 11:32 PM, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
> Refcnt's atomic inc/dec ops are frequent and its idiom need no seq_cst
> order. So to get better performance, it worth to adopt _relaxed
> other than _seq_cst memory model on them.
You'd need to update the documentation then. As it stands, what you've written
looks like a bug.
> +#ifndef _GLIBCXX_ATOMIC_BUILTINS
This will never be defined. It's private to the libstdc++ implementation. See
how we've defined things using __atomic elsewhere in the file, looking at one
of the __ATOMIC defines.
And in either case, it's better form to use positive tests than negative ones.
I.e. #ifdef rather than #ifndef
> #define atomic_fetch_inc(ptr) __sync_fetch_and_add(ptr, 1)
> #define atomic_fetch_dec(ptr) __sync_fetch_and_add(ptr, -1)
I'd prefer atomic_fetch_inc_relaxed, as that's more self-documenting.
But I'll re-iterate the necessity of documentation in this area.
r~