(original) (raw)

Hi Roland,

So what does the graph look like for this example?

sent from my phone

On Jun 23, 2015 6:50 AM, "Roland Westrelin" <roland.westrelin@oracle.com> wrote:

\>> What about
\>>
\>> volatile int y;
\>> volatile int x;
\>>
\>> y=1
\>> x=1
\>> y=2
\>>
\>> transformed to:
\>>
\>> x=1
\>> y=2
\>>
\>> ?
\>
\> I think this is not allowed, since operations over "x" get tied up in
\> the synchronization order.

Thanks. Then for support\_IRIW\_for\_not\_multiple\_copy\_atomic\_cpu true, I don’t see how incorrect reordering is prevented.

Roland.