Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 825665
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 15, 20262026-05-15T03:17:33+00:00 2026-05-15T03:17:33+00:00

Assume this code: static inline void inc(int64_t* atomic) { __asm__ __volatile__ ( lock incq

  • 0

Assume this code:

  static inline void inc(int64_t* atomic)
  {
    __asm__ __volatile__
    (
      "lock incq %0\n"
        : "=m" (*atomic)
        : "m" (*atomic)
    );
  }

The Clang compiler doesn’t support the lock prefix (yet?). What shall I do now?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-15T03:17:33+00:00Added an answer on May 15, 2026 at 3:17 am

    Why not use the built-ins…?

    static inlint void inc(int64_t* atomic) {
       __sync_add_and_fetch_8(atomic, 1);
    }
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Let's assume i got this code: internal static bool WriteTransaction(string command) { using (SqlConnection
Let's assume following code snippet: public class NotThatWellWrittenClass { public static void doSmth() {
Assume I have the following code: public static class Foo { public static void
Assume this code works: left '*' left '+' expr: expr '+' expr | expr
Assume I have executed this js code: var container=function() { //do something } container.a=function
Assume that I have this piece of code: @interface Foo : NSObject { Bar
So I have this piece of code, and let's assume I'm filling out a
I have this C# code: private static double[,][] _temp = null; I don't think
I think this code should be fine but Static Analyzer doesn't like it. I
I've just found this function definition in some embedded code: float round_float_to_4(static float inputval);

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.