Comments on: STM Compiler http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/09/16/stm-compiler/ Sat, 30 Aug 2008 02:12:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Joe Crumm http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/09/16/stm-compiler/#comment-6904 Joe Crumm Wed, 19 Sep 2007 21:42:21 +0000 http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/09/16/stm-compiler/#comment-6904 Xinmin: Yes indeed, I somehow missed the third sample. jc Xinmin: Yes indeed, I somehow missed the third sample.

jc

]]> By: Xinmin Tian http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/09/16/stm-compiler/#comment-6899 Xinmin Tian Wed, 19 Sep 2007 19:57:33 +0000 http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/09/16/stm-compiler/#comment-6899 The sample code #3 we posted uses the POSIX threads and __tm_atomic on Linux platform. -Xinmin The sample code #3 we posted uses the POSIX threads and __tm_atomic on Linux platform.

-Xinmin

]]> By: Jim Cownie http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/09/16/stm-compiler/#comment-6865 Jim Cownie Tue, 18 Sep 2007 08:00:14 +0000 http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/09/16/stm-compiler/#comment-6865 Joe, you can use the TM atomic blocks with any threading subsystem. We're using OpenMP just because it makes it easier to write small, portable pieces of code. Good luck, please provide more feedback. -- Jim Joe, you can use the TM atomic blocks with any threading subsystem. We're using OpenMP just because it makes it easier to write small, portable pieces of code.

Good luck, please provide more feedback.

-- Jim

]]> By: Joe Crumm http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/09/16/stm-compiler/#comment-6861 Joe Crumm Tue, 18 Sep 2007 03:28:10 +0000 http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/09/16/stm-compiler/#comment-6861 Very interesting technology. Looking at your samples, I was wondering if the atomic blocks work with Windows/Linux threads or does one have to use OpenMP constructs for parallelism? (or do I have to learn OpenMP first to use it?) jc Very interesting technology. Looking at your samples, I was wondering if the atomic blocks work with Windows/Linux threads or does one have to use OpenMP constructs for parallelism? (or do I have to learn OpenMP first to use it?)

jc

]]> By: Joseph Seigh http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/09/16/stm-compiler/#comment-6842 Joseph Seigh Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:20:15 +0000 http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2007/09/16/stm-compiler/#comment-6842 I once did an STM implmentation in Java as an exercise to see what the api and implementation issues would be. Language issues were mainly Java closures and abstract pointer support being really really awkward. C++ has the same issues. You can solve the issues by putting support in the compiler but this creates portability issues. Since STM is about scalability, you're talking about very large applications. At this point it would require a huge leap of faith and significant resources to port the application to STM even if portability wasn't an issue. Non portability makes it worse. I once did an STM implmentation in Java as an exercise to see what the api and implementation issues would be. Language issues were mainly Java closures and abstract pointer support being really really awkward. C++ has the same issues.

You can solve the issues by putting support in the compiler but this creates portability issues. Since STM is about scalability, you're talking about very large applications. At this point it would require a huge leap of faith and significant resources to port the application to STM even if portability wasn't an issue. Non portability makes it worse.

]]>