Re: Best practice for linking against libatomic?

Simon,

On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 12:11 PM Florian Weimer via Gcc-help
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> * Simon Richter:
>
> > Is there a recommended way of handling this for package maintainers,
> > or should this really be done at system level (e.g. by hacking the
> > specs)?
>
> GCC 16 will automatically link libatomic as required.

For ref:
* https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358

> Does RISC-V have default-lock-free atomics in libatomic?  Those should
> probably be in statically linked libgcc instead, similar to AArch64's
> outline atomics.
>
> In general, programmers should avoid emulated atomics because it's
> rarely useful.  Automatic fallback to imperfect emulation probably does
> more harm than good.

This has worked for while in Debian:

* https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/tbb/-/blob/master/debian/rules?ref_type=heads#L31-34

I've also written a cmake function to detect only when needed (see hwy/libjxl).

2cts
-- 
Mathieu