Re: Compiler ordering barriers in C++0x

"Dmitriy V'jukov" <dvyukov@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:c5199756-8669-419e-84e9-1de582eff02e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I can prove that I have happens-before relation if I can enforce
> correct compiler ordering. Consider following code:
>
> std::vector<int> g_nonatomic_user_data;
> std::atomic_int g_atomic1;
> std::atomic_int g_atomic2;
>
> std::vector<int> thread()
> {
> g_atomic1.store(1, std::memory_order_relaxed);
> // compiler store-load fence
> if (g_atomic2.load(std::memory_order_relaxed))
[...]

Are you sure that atomic store with 'memory_order_relaxed' semantics
injects
a #StoreLoad after the operation?


-- 
      [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm
for info about ]
      [ comp.lang.c++.moderated.    First time posters: Do this! ]