Re: Portable memory barrier?

[Jere <jhb.chat@gmail.com>]

On Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 3:57:50 PM UTC-4, Randy Brukardt wrote:
> "Robert Eachus" wrote in message 
> ...
> >The compiler will play some games, and certainly will leave Write_Index in 
> >a register if possible.
> 
> It better not is Write_Index is Atomic.
> 
> Which is my point on this discussion: what the CPU does is irrelevant if the 
> compiler is implemented correctly. If it isn't, then the compiler is wrong. 
> QED.
> 
> Only the compiler vendor need worry about this level of discussion. 
> Honestly, I doubt anyone else is qualified. (I'm not, and I AM a compiler 
> vendor... ;-)
> 
>                                      Randy.

Is there a method besides Atomic?  If I am implementing a generic FIFO (lock 
free) and the FIFO elements are complex data types that may not be able to be 
atomic, do I have any other options or are protected objects my only way out?

As an example, if my FIFO was an array of some records that contained a 64 bit 
integer?  I know I can make the FIFO volatile, but as you indicated, that isn't 
enough.  I can't make it Atomic either.