Use proper atomics and ref counting #807
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@swift-ci please test |
|
@ktoso My bad! It compiled and ran fine on my machine but I found the mistake and fixed it. Can we please try one more time? |
|
@compnerd Can we please do a test? |
|
I'm not sure that this is valuable enough to do really. |
|
I'm not sure what the point of the atomics change is. The control flow change is non-obvious and totally unexplained in either comments or in the PR summary. |
AZero13
force-pushed
the
atomic-3
branch
7 times, most recently
from
2da1073 to
5acdd2b
Compare
rjmccall
reviewed
Jan 2, 2024
Prefer __atomic_compare_exchange_n over __sync_bool_compare_and_swap. I chose weak because we are looping and reading the value of old_value constantly anyway, so it would be better to have it weak. Otherwise, it is equivalent to what it was before.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Prefer __atomic_compare_exchange_n over __sync_bool_compare_and_swap.
I chose weak because we are looping and reading the value of old_value constantly anyway, so it would be better to have it weak.
Otherwise, it is equivalent to what it was before.