From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: will@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stern@rowland.harvard.edu,
parri.andrea@gmail.com, npiggin@gmail.com, dhowells@redhat.com,
j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk, luc.maranget@inria.fr, paulmck@kernel.org,
akiyks@gmail.com, dlustig@nvidia.com, joel@joelfernandes.org,
chenhuacai@gmail.com, guoren@kernel.org, geert@linux-m68k.org,
chenhuacai@loongson.cn, mingo@redhat.com, arnd@arndb.de,
wangrui@loongson.cn, lixuefeng@loongson.cn,
jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com
Subject: [PATCH] Documentation/atomic_t: Document forward progress expectations
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2021 16:40:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YQK9ziyogxTH0m9H@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
Add a few words on forward progress; there's been quite a bit of
confusion on the subject.
Specifically, more complex locking primitives (ticket/qspinlock) require
forward progress from their consituent operations in order to provide
better/more guarantees than TaS locks.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
---
--- a/Documentation/atomic_t.txt
+++ b/Documentation/atomic_t.txt
@@ -312,3 +312,56 @@ Both provide the same functionality, but
NB. try_cmpxchg() also generates better code on some platforms (notably x86)
where the function more closely matches the hardware instruction.
+
+
+FORWARD PROGRESS
+----------------
+
+In general strong forward progress is expected of all unconditional atomic
+operations -- those in the Arithmetic and Bitwise classes and xchg(). However
+a fair amount of code also requires forward progress from the conditional
+atomic operations.
+
+Specifically 'simple' cmpxchg() loops are expected to not starve one another
+indefinitely. However, this is not evident on LL/SC architectures, because
+while an LL/SC architecure 'can/should/must' provide forward progress
+guarantees between competing LL/SC sections, such a guarantee does not
+transfer to cmpxchg() implemented using LL/SC. Consider:
+
+ old = atomic_read(&v);
+ do {
+ new = func(old);
+ } while (!atomic_try_cmpxchg(&v, &old, new));
+
+which on LL/SC becomes something like:
+
+ old = atomic_read(&v);
+ do {
+ new = func(old);
+ } while (!({
+ volatile asm ("1: LL %[oldval], %[v]\n"
+ " CMP %[oldval], %[old]\n"
+ " BNE 2f\n"
+ " SC %[new], %[v]\n"
+ " BNE 1b\n"
+ "2:\n"
+ : [oldval] "=&r" (oldval), [v] "m" (v)
+ : [old] "r" (old), [new] "r" (new)
+ : "memory");
+ success = (oldval == old);
+ if (!success)
+ old = oldval;
+ success; }));
+
+However, even the forward branch from the failed compare can cause the LL/SC
+to fail on some architectures, let alone whatever the compiler makes of the C
+loop body. As a result there is no guarantee what so ever the cacheline
+containing @v will stay on the local CPU and progress is made.
+
+Even native CAS architectures can fail to provide forward progress for their
+primitive (See Sparc64 for an example).
+
+Such implementations are strongly encouraged to add exponential backoff loops
+to a failed CAS in order to ensure some progress. Affected architectures are
+also strongly encouraged to inspect/audit the atomic fallbacks, refcount_t and
+their locking primitives.
next reply other threads:[~2021-07-29 14:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-29 14:40 Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2021-07-29 16:24 ` [PATCH] Documentation/atomic_t: Document forward progress expectations hev
2021-07-29 20:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-08-05 9:40 ` [tip: locking/core] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YQK9ziyogxTH0m9H@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akiyks@gmail.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=chenhuacai@gmail.com \
--cc=chenhuacai@loongson.cn \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dlustig@nvidia.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=guoren@kernel.org \
--cc=j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk \
--cc=jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lixuefeng@loongson.cn \
--cc=luc.maranget@inria.fr \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=parri.andrea@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
--cc=wangrui@loongson.cn \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.