From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Vineet Gupta' <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: arcml <linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: single copy atomicity for double load/stores on 32-bit systems
Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 09:41:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <895ec12746c246579aed5dd98ace6e38@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2fd3a455-6267-5d21-c530-41964a4f6ce9@synopsys.com>
From: Vineet Gupta
> Sent: 30 May 2019 19:23
...
> While it seems reasonable form hardware pov to not implement such atomicity by
> default it seems there's an additional burden on application writers. They could
> be happily using a lockless algorithm with just a shared flag between 2 threads
> w/o need for any explicit synchronization. But upgrade to a new compiler which
> aggressively "packs" struct rendering long long 32-bit aligned (vs. 64-bit before)
> causing the code to suddenly stop working. Is the onus on them to declare such
> memory as c11 atomic or some such.
A 'new' compiler can't suddenly change the alignment rules for structure elements.
The alignment rules will be part of the ABI.
More likely is that the structure itself is unexpectedly allocated on
an 8n+4 boundary due to code changes elsewhere.
It is also worth noting that for complete portability only writes to
'full words' can be assumed atomic.
Some old Alpha's did RMW cycles for byte writes.
(Although I suspect Linux doesn't support those any more.)
Even x86 can catch you out.
The bit operations will do wider RMW cycles than you expect.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-31 9:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-30 18:22 single copy atomicity for double load/stores on 32-bit systems Vineet Gupta
2019-05-30 18:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-05-30 19:16 ` Vineet Gupta
2019-05-31 8:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-31 8:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-31 8:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-03 18:08 ` Vineet Gupta
2019-06-03 20:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-06-03 21:59 ` Vineet Gupta
2019-06-04 7:41 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-06-06 9:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-06-06 9:53 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-06-06 16:34 ` David Laight
2019-06-06 21:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-06-03 18:43 ` Vineet Gupta
2019-07-01 20:05 ` Vineet Gupta
2019-07-02 10:46 ` Will Deacon
2019-05-31 9:41 ` David Laight [this message]
2019-05-31 11:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-06-03 18:44 ` Vineet Gupta
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=895ec12746c246579aed5dd98ace6e38@AcuMS.aculab.com \
--to=david.laight@aculab.com \
--cc=Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com \
--cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).