This web mail archive is frozen.
This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.
You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails
have been added to it since July of 2016.
Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.
On Jan 16, 2013, at 6:41 AM, Leif Lindholm <Leif.Lindholm_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> That isn't, technically speaking, correct for the Raspberry Pi - but it is a workaround if you know you will never actually use the asm implementations of the atomics, but only the inline C ones..
> This sort of hides the problem that the dedicated barrier instructions were not available in ARMv6 (it used "system control coprocessor operations" instead.
> If you ever executed the asm implementation, you would trigger an undefined instruction exception on the Pi.
Hah; sweet. Ok.
So what's the right answer? Would it be acceptable to use a no-op for this operation on such architectures?
For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/