public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Greg Burd <[email protected]>
To: Thomas Munro <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Dave Cramer <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix ARM64/MSVC atomic memory ordering issues on Win11 by adding explicit DMB ​barriers
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2025 15:41:52 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+hUKG+r5TUe0vvqyFdD4cCpmYOXNso3QJ0whi0Md0YY6xG-Gw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+hUKG+r5TUe0vvqyFdD4cCpmYOXNso3QJ0whi0Md0YY6xG-Gw@mail.gmail.com>


On Nov 23 2025, at 3:32 pm, Thomas Munro <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 4:55 AM Andres Freund <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > -  if cc.links(prog, name: '__crc32cb, __crc32ch, __crc32cw, and
>> __crc32cd without -march=armv8-a+crc',
>> > +  if cc.get_id() == 'msvc'
>> > +    cdata.set('USE_ARMV8_CRC32C', 1)
>> > +    have_optimized_crc = true
>>  
>> Should have a comment explaining why we can do this unconditionally...
>  
> I was wondering about that in light of your revelation that it must be
> using /arch:armv8.0 by default.  If we only support Windows/ARM on
> armv8.1 hardware (like Windows 11 itself), then I think that means
> that we'd want /arch:armv8.1 here:
>  
> +  # Add ARM64 architecture flag for Windows 11 ARM64 for correct intrensics
> +  if host_machine.system() == 'windows' and host_machine.cpu_family()
> == 'aarch64'
> +    add_project_arguments('/arch:armv9.4', language: ['c', 'cpp'])
> +  endif

Hey Thomas,

Turns out that flag isn't required at all, the issue was the S_UNLOCK()
implementation's use of a compiler barrier not a CPU memory barrier.

> We can't impose our own random high ISA requirement like that, or some
> machines will choke on illegal instructions.

New incoming patch drops this entirely, so no need to worry about it.

> I wonder if the same applies to Visual Studio on x86.  The OS now
> requires x86-64-v2 (like RHEL9, and many other Linux distros except
> Debian?), but Visual Studio might not know that... but then we might
> say that's an issue for the EDB packaging crew to think about, not us.
>  
> In that case we might want to say "OK you choose the ARM version, but
> we're not going to write the runtime test for CRC on armv8, we'll do a
> compile-time test only, because it would be stupid to waste time
> writing code for armv8.0".

best.

-greg

view thread (42+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix ARM64/MSVC atomic memory ordering issues on Win11 by adding explicit DMB ​barriers
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox