From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-06-09 06:40:38
I think we need to be prepared to treat SMP synchronization with a separate
value of BOOST_MT. Non-SMP synchronization could in theory be much more
----- Original Message -----
From: "Branko Èibej" <branko.cibej_at_[hidden]>
John Maddock wrote:
> >No, you need an atomic operation to do "lock.data = 0", so you've
> >again got a function call (or inline assembly -- completely off the
> >rails of defined behaviour).
> At least on intel, all aligned writes are atomic, there is no need for
> assember in this case.
What about SMP? Think cache synchronization ...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk