[LAD] [LAU] Simple, easy multithreaded circular buffer library for Linux?

[Paul Coccoli]

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 12:24 AM, Jack O'Quin <jack.oquin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 10:45 PM, Paul Coccoli <pcoccoli at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 11:29 PM, Jack O'Quin <jack.oquin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This is wrong.  For the single reader, single writer case, atomic operations
>>> are *not* necessary.  The bug, as was already pointed out, is due to storing
>>
>> Let's agree to disagree, then.  Single-reader, single-writer does not
>> automatically make something SMP safe.  There is large body of
>> literature on lock-free data structures that agrees with me; someone
>> posted a link to a collection of those earlier in the thread.
>
> Let's not.  This is not just a matter of opinion.  If you read that literature,
> you will find that the ring buffer *is* safe for the single reader,
> single writer
> case.  In many other SMP situations, atomic operations *are* required,
> but not for ring buffers.

The only time you can get away without atomic ops is on uni-processor.
 Please cite a reference that says otherwise.

Notice that all the fixes proposed all involve removing the "+=" and
using only assignment.