stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Teleman <>
Subject Re: STDCXX-1056 [was: Re: STDCXX forks]
Date Sun, 16 Sep 2012 07:20:47 GMT
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Liviu Nicoara <> wrote:

> Now, to clear the confusion I created: the timing numbers I posted in the
> attachment stdcxx-1056-timings.tgz to STDCXX-1066 (09/11/2012) showed that a
> perfectly forwarding, no caching public interface (exemplified by a changed
> grouping) performs better than the current implementation. It was that test
> case that I hoped you could time, perhaps on SPARC, in both MT and ST
> builds. The t.cpp program is for MT, s.cpp for ST.

I got your patch, and have tested it.

I have created two Experiments (that's what they are called) with the
SunPro Performance Analyzer. Both experiments are targeting race
conditions and deadlocks in the instrumented program,  and both
experiments are running the program from the
stdcxx test harness. One experiment is with  your patch applied. The
other experiment is with our (Solaris) patch applied.

Here are the results:

1. with your patch applied:

2. with our (Solaris) patch applied:


Stefan Teleman
KDE e.V.

View raw message