[0/4] Provide C11 atomic operations
Commit Message
On Thu, 2014-11-20 at 20:50 +0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2014, Torvald Riegel wrote:
>
> > I have committed this patch after some more code comparison for x86_64
> > pthread_once using a current GCC, and a regression check on x86_64. The
> > fast path has identical code. On the slow path, there are some minor
> > differences in which instructions are used, but I didn't spot anything
> > hat looked significant.
> > I've also fixed the Changelog; Adhemerval, thanks for spotting this.
>
> What is the basis for __HAVE_64B_ATOMICS in
> sysdeps/microblaze/bits/atomic.h? It looks to me as if the existing
> 64-bit operations there all abort.
It's a mistake. Thanks for spotting this. I have committed the
following fix:
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2014-11-21 Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
+
+ * sysdeps/microblaze/bits/atomic.h (__HAVE_64B_ATOMICS): Fix
value
+ by setting it to 0. 64b atomics are not supported currently.
+
2014-11-21 Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
[BZ #16469]
b/sysdeps/microblaze/bits/atomic.h
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ typedef uintptr_t uatomicptr_t;
typedef intmax_t atomic_max_t;
typedef uintmax_t uatomic_max_t;
-#define __HAVE_64B_ATOMICS 1
+#define __HAVE_64B_ATOMICS 0
#define USE_ATOMIC_COMPILER_BUILTINS 0