[LLVMdev] Proposal for a new LLVM concurrency memory model
Renato Golin
rengolin at systemcall.org
Mon Apr 26 03:14:00 PDT 2010
On 26 April 2010 10:49, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote:
> Certainly for languages such as Java, they will make up a surprisingly large
> chunk of the loads and stores, and instructions have much mor flexibility in
> terms of syntax. On the flip side, it's a lot of plumbing IIRC, and we'd
> really need to stick to the very minimal set of operations, supporting more
> obscure ones by pattern matching or intrinsics.
If you add it to the instructions, their syntax will be more complex
than they are today, and reading them could prove a challenge.
IMHO, we should keep it simple. I agree that multi-task is ubiquitous
nowadays but the detailed implementation might vary considerably from
language to language and making it explicit only helps, at least in
the beginning.
cheers,
--renato
http://systemcall.org/
Reclaim your digital rights, eliminate DRM, learn more at
http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm
More information about the llvm-dev
mailing list