Hi, There are some libraries that would prefer to be reviewed after Boost.Atomic is reviewed, otherwise them should move the library as an internal detail of the implementation. Could the people working on Boost.Atomic tell us what is the state of the library? Which platforms have been handled? Which part of the standard has been implemented? Could others having knowledge in assembler participate in this project? When we can expect the library to be ready for review? Best, Vicente
PING! Vicente Botet wrote:
Hi,
There are some libraries that would prefer to be reviewed after Boost.Atomic is reviewed, otherwise them should move the library as an internal detail of the implementation.
Could the people working on Boost.Atomic tell us what is the state of the library? Which platforms have been handled? Which part of the standard has been implemented?
Could others having knowledge in assembler participate in this project?
When we can expect the library to be ready for review?
Best, Vicente _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/atomic-Status-tp3234438p3260785.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I'll ping too. :) I think this library is very important, and it'd be sad for it to disappear. On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Vicente Botet <vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr>wrote:
PING!
Vicente Botet wrote:
Hi,
There are some libraries that would prefer to be reviewed after Boost.Atomic is reviewed, otherwise them should move the library as an internal detail of the implementation.
Could the people working on Boost.Atomic tell us what is the state of the library? Which platforms have been handled? Which part of the standard
has
been implemented?
Could others having knowledge in assembler participate in this project?
When we can expect the library to be ready for review?
Best, Vicente _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/atomic-Status-tp3234438p3260785.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-- GMan, Nick Gorski
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 We've (Parallex group) got some important fixes for Atomic (the library is broken on Intel, notably, because __amd64__ is the macro used to detect x86_64 bit systems, Intel obviously does not define this macro :P. Not sure the extent of the rest of our changes). I know Hartmut has put some amount of hacking into Atomic... hopefully our changes can be sent upstream and this library will be up for review in the near future. - -- Bryce Lelbach aka wash boost-spirit.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk1PhQIACgkQ9cB/V3/s9EwOnwCfR9SULuiKOIjR/jF+UqH3ZB+u ESUAn39yn8AAnYByOMJV0om0ysBwVDXT =SPJ9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Bryce Lelbach aka wash wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
We've (Parallex group) got some important fixes for Atomic (the library is broken on Intel, notably, because __amd64__ is the macro used to detect x86_64 bit systems, Intel obviously does not define this macro :P. Not sure the extent of the rest of our changes).
I know Hartmut has put some amount of hacking into Atomic... hopefully our changes can be sent upstream and this library will be up for review in the near future.
Hi, as it seems this important library is orphaned, it will be great if people having the needed competences could go ahead and make the library ready for review. Is there a volunteer to lead this group. Thanks, Vicente -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/atomic-Status-tp3234438p3297164.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Am 09.02.2011 13:43, schrieb Vicente Botet:
Bryce Lelbach aka wash wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
We've (Parallex group) got some important fixes for Atomic (the library is broken on Intel, notably, because __amd64__ is the macro used to detect x86_64 bit systems, Intel obviously does not define this macro :P. Not sure the extent of the rest of our changes).
I know Hartmut has put some amount of hacking into Atomic... hopefully our changes can be sent upstream and this library will be up for review in the near future.
Hi,
as it seems this important library is orphaned, it will be great if people having the needed competences could go ahead and make the library ready for review. Is there a volunteer to lead this group.
Thanks, Vicente
Helge has been signed off sick for multiple days - we should wait until next week. Oliver
Oliver Kowalke <k-oli <at> gmx.de> writes:
Hi,
as it seems this important library is orphaned, it will be great if people having the needed competences could go ahead and make the library ready for review. Is there a volunteer to lead this group.
Thanks, Vicente
Helge has been signed off sick for multiple days - we should wait until next week.
I have personal interest in this library going through. If there is anything needs to be done to speed up review process and I can help please let me know. Also if there is a need for review manager you can count on me. Gennadiy
as it seems this important library is orphaned, it will be great if people having the needed competences could go ahead and make the library ready for review. Is there a volunteer to lead this group.
Helge has been signed off sick for multiple days - we should wait until next week.
I have personal interest in this library going through.
If there is anything needs to be done to speed up review process and I can help please let me know.
i've been using boost.atomic in my lockfree library. from my experience, it is well designed, but it would benefit from some contributions to support more platforms. there is some fallback code using a spinlock pool, but native atomics for compilers other than gcc are still missing. so it would be great if people, who are using unsupported compilers could contribute some implementations ... tim -- tim@klingt.org http://tim.klingt.org After one look at this planet any visitor from outer space would say "I want to see the manager." William S. Burroughs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 We use a patched version Boost.Atomic at work (hacked on mostly by Hartmut Kaiser). I'd like to see our changes pushed upstream. Is this (candidate) library without a maintainer now? - -- Bryce Lelbach aka wash boost-spirit.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk1TRi8ACgkQ9cB/V3/s9Ex/BACgjK+AHq83HaE6ZSRO0PhEc5KS USoAn180QkBQxdLSqTDmN5FXEgcix/jh =WSpG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Am 10.02.2011 02:58, schrieb Bryce Lelbach (wash):
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
We use a patched version Boost.Atomic at work (hacked on mostly by Hartmut Kaiser). I'd like to see our changes pushed upstream. Is this (candidate) library without a maintainer now?
no - Helge is the author. As I wrote in my previous eMail he has been signed off sick. Oliver
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I will make our changes to Boost.Atomic available tommorrow - I just need to clean them up a little. We also use Lockfree at work, though I don't know if Hartmut has hacked up our copy of Lockfree. Tim, would you like to see those changes, as well? - -- Bryce Lelbach aka wash boost-spirit.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk1T8owACgkQ9cB/V3/s9Ew2zQCgh5S3g0ybFWJPaR6ssEE7gj+E vwIAniKPQDPU0mZK2NkZwB2fXRv3uo+D =Gb7t -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
We also use Lockfree at work, though I don't know if Hartmut has hacked up our copy of Lockfree. Tim, would you like to see those changes, as well?
always nice to see, that someone is using it ... yes, if you have introduced changes, it would be interesting to see how, where and why ... tim -- tim@klingt.org http://tim.klingt.org The price an artist pays for doing what he wants is that he has to do it. William S. Burroughs
Am 10.02.2011 16:27, schrieb Tim Blechmann:
We also use Lockfree at work, though I don't know if Hartmut has hacked up our copy of Lockfree. Tim, would you like to see those changes, as well?
always nice to see, that someone is using it ... yes, if you have introduced changes, it would be interesting to see how, where and why ...
could you send me the patches - I'll give the patches Helge if I see him on monday. Oliver
We use a patched version Boost.Atomic at work (hacked on mostly by Hartmut Kaiser). I'd like to see our changes pushed upstream. Is this (candidate) library without a maintainer now?
in the meantime i would be interested to include your changes into the boost.lockfree repository. tim -- tim@klingt.org http://tim.klingt.org After one look at this planet any visitor from outer space would say "I want to see the manager." William S. Burroughs
Hi everyone, thanks Olli for the heads-up, and sorry to everyone for not replying earlier (incapacitated by flu) On Wed, 9 Feb 2011, Bryce Lelbach wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
We use a patched version Boost.Atomic at work (hacked on mostly by Hartmut Kaiser). I'd like to see our changes pushed upstream. Is this (candidate) library without a maintainer now?
I'm actively maintaining it, and if you have patches please just forward them to me. I am always especially eager to apply patches that improve support for platforms that I cannot test on myself. If there is something I can/must do in order to make it "reviewable", just tell me and I'll see it done. Helge
On 2/9/2011 9:41 AM, Tim Blechmann wrote:
I have personal interest in this library going through.
If there is anything needs to be done to speed up review process and I can help please let me know.
i've been using boost.atomic in my lockfree library. from my experience, it is well designed, but it would benefit from some contributions to support more platforms. there is some fallback code using a spinlock pool, but native atomics for compilers other than gcc are still missing. so it would be great if people, who are using unsupported compilers could contribute some implementations ...
tim
What is the current state of platform support? I downloaded lockfree from your klingt.org site and it still seems to be missing MSVC support. GCC and MSVC x86[_64] are the platforms I care about. I could take a crack at adding MSVC support but perhaps someone has already done it? -Matt
What is the current state of platform support? I downloaded lockfree from your klingt.org site and it still seems to be missing MSVC support. GCC and MSVC x86[_64] are the platforms I care about. I could take a crack at adding MSVC support but perhaps someone has already done it?
there is basic support for the interlocked API [1] ... but it seems to only support 32bit sized types ... would be great, if you could extend it for 64bit types ... thanks, tim [1] http://tim.klingt.org/git?p=boost_lockfree.git;a=blob;f=boost/atomic/detail/... -- tim@klingt.org http://tim.klingt.org Linux is like a wigwam: no windows, no gates, apache inside, stable.
Am 16.02.2011 20:52, schrieb Tim Blechmann:
What is the current state of platform support? I downloaded lockfree from your klingt.org site and it still seems to be missing MSVC support. GCC and MSVC x86[_64] are the platforms I care about. I could take a crack at adding MSVC support but perhaps someone has already done it?
there is basic support for the interlocked API [1] ... but it seems to only support 32bit sized types ... would be great, if you could extend it for 64bit types ...
thanks, tim
[1] http://tim.klingt.org/git?p=boost_lockfree.git;a=blob;f=boost/atomic/detail/...
you should check your patches against Helges repo http://git.chaoticmind.net/boost.atomic first.
What is the current state of platform support? I downloaded lockfree from your klingt.org site and it still seems to be missing MSVC support. GCC and MSVC x86[_64] are the platforms I care about. I could take a crack at adding MSVC support but perhaps someone has already done it?
there is basic support for the interlocked API [1] ... but it seems to only support 32bit sized types ... would be great, if you could extend it for 64bit types ...
FWIW, the patches Bryce referred to add 64 bit support for Windows. We're still busy cleaning them up, but will sent them really soon now. Regards Hartmut --------------- http://boost-spirit.com
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:29 PM, Hartmut Kaiser <hartmut.kaiser@gmail.com>wrote:
What is the current state of platform support? I downloaded lockfree from your klingt.org site and it still seems to be missing MSVC support. GCC and MSVC x86[_64] are the platforms I care about. I could take a crack at adding MSVC support but perhaps someone has already done it?
there is basic support for the interlocked API [1] ... but it seems to only support 32bit sized types ... would be great, if you could extend it for 64bit types ...
FWIW, the patches Bryce referred to add 64 bit support for Windows. We're still busy cleaning them up, but will sent them really soon now.
Regards Hartmut --------------- http://boost-spirit.com
Any status updates? (Please know I don't intend to sound pushy or anything like that, just curious what the state of the library might be.) -- GMan, Nick Gorski
participants (10)
-
Bryce Lelbach -
Gennadiy Rozental -
GMan -
Hartmut Kaiser -
Helge Bahmann -
Matthew Chambers -
Oliver Kowalke -
Tim Blechmann -
Vicente Botet -
vicente.botet