Subj : Re: Memory visibility and MS Interlocked instructions To : comp.programming.threads From : David Hopwood Date : Thu Sep 01 2005 12:46 am Joe Seigh wrote: > Alexander Terekhov wrote: >> David Hopwood wrote: >> [...] >> >>> Yes, but PC alone does not imply load == load.acq. >>> (I think; I'm not 100% sure.) >> >> Heck, >> >> PC: >> >> (1) before a load access is allowed to perform with respect to any >> other processor, all previous load accesses must be performed, and >> >> (2) before a store access is allowed to perform with respect to any >> other processor, all previous load and store accesses must be performed. >> > > You're making this up I think. Huh? It's a direct quote from . -- David Hopwood .