Boost logo

Boost :

From: Markus Schöpflin (markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-10 12:19:22

Ion Gaztañaga schrieb:

> Markus Schöpflin escribió:
>> Hello,
>> this may be a silly question, but I have been wondering what the atomic
>> read and write primitives are actually supposed to do?
>> I mean, from the readers or writers POV a read or write is always atomic,
>> isn't it? Am I missing something very obvious here?
> In some architectures, a 32 read might not be atomic (even if the read
> is aligned). I think that Intel system is always atomic. They are there
> for completeness, to support systems where read or write might not be
> atomic.

Sorry for being dense, but what exactly do you mean when you say a read
might not be atomic? Are you thinking of memory barriers here? Or is it
something else? Is there somewhere a definition of what atomic exactly
means here?

I'm asking because I'm currently evaluating how much of work it would be
to make interprocess work on Tru64.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at