[concurrency-interest] Does StampedLock need a releaseFence in theory?

Andrew Haley aph at redhat.com
Thu Jul 14 04:23:22 EDT 2016

On 14/07/16 01:53, Hans Boehm wrote:
> An ARMv8 compareAndSet operation (using only acquire and release
> operations, not dmb, as it should be implemented) will behave like the
> lock-based one in this respect.  I think the current code above is
> incorrect on ARMv8 (barring compensating pessimizations elsewhere).

Umm, what?  The ARMv8 compareAndSet has a sequentially consistent store.
I guess I must be missing something important.


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list