| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<vftnat$27k8k$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: smrproxy v2 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 12:36:45 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 23 Message-ID: <vftnat$27k8k$1@dont-email.me> References: <vequrc$2o7qc$1@dont-email.me> <verr04$2stfq$1@dont-email.me> <verubk$2t9bs$1@dont-email.me> <ves78h$2ugvm$2@dont-email.me> <vetj1f$39iuv$1@dont-email.me> <vfh4dh$3bnuq$1@dont-email.me> <vfh7mg$3c2hs$1@dont-email.me> <vfm4iq$ill4$1@dont-email.me> <vfmesn$k6mn$1@dont-email.me> <vfmf21$kavl$1@dont-email.me> <vfmm9a$lob3$1@dont-email.me> <vfn2di$r8ca$1@dont-email.me> <vfntgb$vete$1@dont-email.me> <vfp1c3$16d9f$1@dont-email.me> <vfpd43$186t4$1@dont-email.me> <vfporh$1dqvu$2@dont-email.me> <vfqgrc$1hfo1$2@dont-email.me> <vfrlm1$1np4q$2@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 17:36:46 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="a37275ffab632ae3cdb481c13372e4d8"; logging-data="2347284"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX199gZzQXb6EkeBfKxYHryRJ" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:MQkUWxFtftXGX5Dton93T5hV5AI= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <vfrlm1$1np4q$2@dont-email.me> Bytes: 2326 On 10/29/24 17:56, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 10/29/2024 4:27 AM, jseigh wrote: >> >> Yes. It's just an optimization. The reader threads could read >> from the global epoch but it would be in a separate cache line >> and be an extra dependent load. So one dependent load and >> same cache line. > > Are you taking advantage of the fancy alignment capabilities of C++? > > https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/alignas > > and friends? They seem to work fine wrt the last time I checked them. > > It's nice to have a standard way to pad and align on cache line > boundaries. :^) It's target processor dependent. You need to query the cache line size and pass to compile as a define variable. There's supposed to be built in define that would be target system dependent but it's not implemented.