[jmm-dev] weakCompareAndSet memory semantics
aph at redhat.com
Fri Apr 22 15:24:48 UTC 2016
On 04/22/2016 02:52 PM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
> I think it boils down to this: it's likely to be slightly faster in some
> situations. If it's not there, someone is going to ask for it, because
> they will want that slight bump, and it's in both C++ and C. It seems
> trivial to implement. So why *not* have it?
There's also the case where you have a highly-contended counter --
think profiling -- and you want to increment it, you can't tolerate
much of a delay. It's a disaster if that counter goes backwards but
failing to increment it at a time of high contention is not so bad.
So you try it once and continue.
More information about the jmm-dev