Subj : Re: YALFAm (Yet Another Lock Free Approach, maybe)
To   : comp.programming.threads
From : David Schwartz
Date : Fri May 27 2005 03:02 pm


"David Butenhof" <david.butenhof@hp.com> wrote in message 
news:9l%ie.5689$566.5130@news.cpqcorp.net...

> The problem with all this is that Microsoft code and documentation was 
> written for a really primitive in-order X86 architecture. The code has 
> been adapted somewhat randomly along the way, documentation has not been 
> updated to reflect DESIGN INTENT, and in fact it's by no means clear that 
> there really IS any design intent.

    The evidence we have from various unofficial sources and from the 
evolving documentation is that Microsoft intends the Interlocked* functions 
to continue to have on all platforms the exact same memory visbility 
semantics they happen to have on current x86 platforms. This seems to be as 
close to a guarantee as we are ever going to get.

    DS

.