http://www.opengroup.org/austin/docs/austin_107.txt
"....
Our advice is as follows.
Hardware that does not allow atomic accesses cannot have
a POSIX implementation on it.
...."
Excuse me, but does this mean that the following
(piece of informal memory model semantics) applies
to POSIX "memory model" as well:
http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel/semantics.pdf
"....
The fact that two variables may be stored in ad-
jacent bytes (e.g., in a byte array) is immaterial.
Two variables can be simultaneously updated by
different threads without needing to use synchro-
nization to account for the fact that they are
'adjacent'. Any word-tearing must be invisible
to the programmer.
...."
<?>
And/or, perhaps, what is actually meant by the "advice"
above is that the *undefined* term "memory location"
is actually a substitute of *defined* POSIX "Byte" term
(C-"char"/CHAR_BIT==8 required) or something like that?
TIA.
regards,
alexander.
Andrew Josey <yyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on 05/10/2002 04:42:01 PM
Please respond to yyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Andrew Josey)
To: yyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:
Subject: Aardvark reports (XBD,XCU,XRAT) from the meeting
All
The initial aardvark reports for XBD, XCU and XRAT are now
in the document register in Austin/107,108,and 109 respectively.
Reviewers are asked to inspect these reports, and are kindly
requested to indicate to the reflector if they take issue
with any decisions of the review team by May 24, when the reports
will be finalized.
regards
Andrew
-----
Andrew Josey The Open Group
Austin Group Chair Apex Plaza,Forbury Road,
Email: yyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Reading,Berks.RG1 1AX,England
Tel: +44 118 9508311 ext 2250 Fax: +44 118 9500110
|