From: | Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Problem with pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u64 at 32-bit platformwd |
Date: | 2020-05-19 13:07:29 |
Message-ID: | 79caaa1f-0290-652f-d203-35d2709e7478@postgrespro.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Definition of pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u64 requires alignment of
expected pointer on 8-byte boundary.
pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u64(volatile pg_atomic_uint64 *ptr,
uint64 *expected, uint64 newval)
{
#ifndef PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_U64_SIMULATION
AssertPointerAlignment(ptr, 8);
AssertPointerAlignment(expected, 8);
#endif
I wonder if there are platforms where such restriction is actually needed.
And if so, looks like our ./src/test/regress/regress.c is working only
occasionally:
static void
test_atomic_uint64(void)
{
pg_atomic_uint64 var;
uint64 expected;
...
if (!pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u64(&var, &expected, 1))
because there is no warranty that "expected" variable will be aligned on
stack at 8 byte boundary (at least at Win32).
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2020-05-19 13:07:40 | Re: Warn when parallel restoring a custom dump without data offsets |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2020-05-19 12:52:07 | Re: some grammar refactoring |