This page is a snapshot from the LWG issues list, see the Library Active Issues List for more information and the meaning of SG1 status.

### 3417. Missing `volatile` atomic deprecations

Section: 31.8.2 [atomics.types.operations] Status: SG1 Submitter: Alisdair Meredith Opened: 2020-03-19 Last modified: 2020-09-06

Priority: 3

View other active issues in [atomics.types.operations].

View all other issues in [atomics.types.operations].

View all issues with SG1 status.

Discussion:

Paper P1831R1 aimed to deprecate all the atomic overloads for `volatile` qualified member function of `std::atomic` unless `is_always_lock_free` is `true`. There are a few omissions in the wording.

First, `operator++` and `operator--` are correctly constrained, but the deprecated overloads are not restored in Annex D, unlike the other member functions. I confirmed with the paper author this is an accidental oversight, and not an intended change of behavior for C++20.

Secondly, the wait/notify APIs were added after the initial wording For this paper was drafted, and the paper did not catch up. Again, I confirmed with the paper author that these functions should be similarly constrained and deprecated.

[2020-04-04 Issue Prioritization]

Priority to 3 after reflector discussion. The suggested wording was generally accepted, but there were considerable doubts that it is necessary to add deprecated functions of the new `wait/notify` functions instead of declaring only the non-volatile overloads. The wish was expressed that both SG1 and LEWG should express their opinion here.

Proposed resolution:

This wording is relative to N4861.

1. Modify 31.8.2 [atomics.types.operations] as indicated:

   >     void wait(T old, memory_order order = memory_order::seq_cst) const volatile noexcept;
   >     void wait(T old, memory_order order = memory_order::seq_cst) const noexcept;

   > > Constraints: For the `volatile` overload of this function, `is_always_lock_free` is `true`.

   > > -29- Preconditions: […]

   > > […]

   >     void notify_one() volatile noexcept;
   >     void notify_one() noexcept;

   > > Constraints: For the `volatile` overload of this function, `is_always_lock_free` is `true`.

   > > -32- Effects: […]

   > > […]

   >     void notify_all() volatile noexcept;
   >     void notify_all() noexcept;

   > > Constraints: For the `volatile` overload of this function, `is_always_lock_free` is `true`.

   > > -34- Effects: […]

   > > […]

2. Modify D.26.2 [depr.atomics.volatile], annex D, as indicated:

   > If an atomic specialization has one of the following overloads, then that overload participates in overload resolution even if `atomic<T>::is_always_lock_free` is `false`:

   > >     void store(T desired, memory_order order = memory_order::seq_cst) volatile noexcept;
   > >     […]
   > >     T* fetch_key(ptrdiff_t operand, memory_order order = memory_order::seq_cst) volatile noexcept;
   > >     value_type operator++(int) volatile noexcept;
   > >     value_type operator--(int) volatile noexcept;
   > >     value_type operator++() volatile noexcept;
   > >     value_type operator--() volatile noexcept;
   > >     void wait(T old, memory_order order = memory_order::seq_cst) const volatile noexcept;
   > >     void notify_one() volatile noexcept;
   > >     void notify_all() volatile noexcept;