This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH v3] lowlevellock comments
- From: Bernie Ogden <bernie dot ogden at linaro dot org>
- To: libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Cc: Torvald Riegel <triegel at redhat dot com>, "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>, Bernard Ogden <bernie dot ogden at linaro dot org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 09:25:47 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] lowlevellock comments
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CALE0ps2oQnDZxfc7hPVyVAY33bzs=apEtwyUH6HjYO_oxjYRNw at mail dot gmail dot com> <1414066371-394-1-git-send-email-bernie dot ogden at linaro dot org>
Ping
On 23 October 2014 13:12, Bernard Ogden <bernie.ogden@linaro.org> wrote:
> Here's a v3. All comments addressed - replies to comments I have something to
> say about inline below.
>
> On 6 October 2014 13:26, Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> To make the >1 state easier to refer to in comments I've gone for:
>>> >1 - locked-with-waiters, there _may_ be waiters
>>>
>>> If I'm right then strictly >1 means locked-possibly-with-waiters, but that's
>>> really getting too much of a mouthful (as 'potentially contended' would have
>>> been in the earlier terminology).
>>
>> But "locked possibly with waiters" is the right description, so I'd
>> rather use this.
>
> OK, changed throughout to 'acquired, possibly with waiters' (based on the
> suggested text below).
>
>>> > Please use locked, or unlocked terms everywhere.
>>>
>>> I've gone for unlocked, locked and locked with waiters.
>>
>> My vote would be for "acquired" / "not acquired", as in "the lock has
>> been acquired".
>
> Switched to acquired/not acquired, as no-one defended locked/unlocked.
>
>>> + thread ID while the clone is running and is reset to zero
>>> + afterwards. */
>>
>> Could you add who resets it?
>
> Done (it's the kernel).
>
>>>
>>> +/* Uses futexes to avoid unnecessary calls into the kernel. Likely paths are
>>
>> I'd say it uses futexes to block using the kernel. That's the purpose
>> of the futex call, so that we don't need to just spin-wait.
> <snip>
>>> + the cases with no waiters and hence do not involve syscalls. Unlikely paths
>>> + usually will involve syscalls to wait or to wake.
>>
>> The "likely" path is not necessarily likely, but we try to make
>> uncontended mutexes fast, so that's why we avoid the syscalls in these
>> cases. I would suggest:
>>
>> Low-level locks use a combination of atomic operations (to acquire and
>> release lock ownership) and futex operations (to block until the state
>> of a lock changes). A lock can be in one of three states:
>> 0: not acquired,
>> 1: acquired; no other threads are blocked or about to block for changes
>> to the lock state,
>>>1: acquired, other threads are potentially blocked or about to block
>> for changes to the lock state.
>>
>> We expect that the common case is an uncontended lock, so we just need
>> to transition the lock between states 0 and 1; releasing the lock does
>> not need to wake any other blocked threads. If the lock is contended
>> and a thread decides to block using a futex operation, then this thread
>> needs to first change the state to >1; if this state is observed during
>> lock release, the releasing thread will wake one of the potentially
>> blocked threads.
>
> Used your text, tweaked slightly to make the difference between 1 and >1 even
> more explicit. Also reworded the >1 description to a form that makes a bit
> more sense to the pedant in me.
>
>>> + cond_locks are never in the locked state, they are either unlocked or
>>> + locked with waiters.
>>
>> Change that to the following?:
>>
>> Condition variables contain an optimization for broadcasts that requeues
>> waiting threads on a lock's futex. Therefore, there is a special
>> variant of the locks (whose name contains "cond") that makes sure to
>> always set the lock state to >1 and not just 1.
>
> And just used this as is.
>
>>> +/* If LOCK is 0 (unlocked), set to 1 (locked) and return 0 to indicate the
>>> + lock was acquired. Otherwise leave the lock unchanged and return non-zero
>>> + to indicate the lock was not acquired. */
>>
>> If you use acquired / not acquired instead of locked / unlocked, this
>> gets simpler.
>
> In that I can be a bit less verbose about the meaning of returns? Done.
>
>>> + 2) The previous owner of the lock dies. FUTEX will be
>>> + ID | FUTEX_OWNER_DIED. FUTEX_WAITERS may also be set. Return FUTEX to
>>> + indicate that the lock is not acquired. */
>>
>> I'd say "this value" instead of the second occurence of "FUTEX" to
>> highlight that we do NOT read FUTEX twice.
>
> Fixed - also put the FUTEX_WAITERS part in brackets and cleared up some
> ambiguity.
>
>
> 2014-10-23 Bernard Ogden <bernie.ogden@linaro.org>
>
> * nptl/lowlevellock.c: Add comments.
> * nptl/lowlevelrobustlock.c: Likewise.
> * sysdeps/nptl/lowlevellock.h: Likewise.
>
> ---
>
> diff --git a/nptl/lowlevellock.c b/nptl/lowlevellock.c
> index e198af7..99cca8e 100644
> --- a/nptl/lowlevellock.c
> +++ b/nptl/lowlevellock.c
> @@ -27,10 +27,10 @@ void
> __lll_lock_wait_private (int *futex)
> {
> if (*futex == 2)
> - lll_futex_wait (futex, 2, LLL_PRIVATE);
> + lll_futex_wait (futex, 2, LLL_PRIVATE); /* Wait if *futex == 2. */
>
> while (atomic_exchange_acq (futex, 2) != 0)
> - lll_futex_wait (futex, 2, LLL_PRIVATE);
> + lll_futex_wait (futex, 2, LLL_PRIVATE); /* Wait if *futex == 2. */
> }
>
>
> @@ -40,10 +40,10 @@ void
> __lll_lock_wait (int *futex, int private)
> {
> if (*futex == 2)
> - lll_futex_wait (futex, 2, private);
> + lll_futex_wait (futex, 2, private); /* Wait if *futex == 2. */
>
> while (atomic_exchange_acq (futex, 2) != 0)
> - lll_futex_wait (futex, 2, private);
> + lll_futex_wait (futex, 2, private); /* Wait if *futex == 2. */
> }
>
>
> @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ __lll_timedlock_wait (int *futex, const struct timespec *abstime, int private)
> if (rt.tv_sec < 0)
> return ETIMEDOUT;
>
> - /* Wait. */
> + /* If *futex == 2, wait until woken or timeout. */
> lll_futex_timed_wait (futex, 2, &rt, private);
> }
>
> @@ -83,6 +83,11 @@ __lll_timedlock_wait (int *futex, const struct timespec *abstime, int private)
> }
>
>
> +/* The kernel notifies a process which uses CLONE_CHILD_CLEARTID via futex
> + wake-up when the clone terminates. The memory location contains the
> + thread ID while the clone is running and is reset to zero by the kernel
> + afterwards. The kernel up to version 3.16.3 does not use the private futex
> + operations for futex wake-up when the clone terminates. */
> int
> __lll_timedwait_tid (int *tidp, const struct timespec *abstime)
> {
> @@ -113,8 +118,10 @@ __lll_timedwait_tid (int *tidp, const struct timespec *abstime)
> if (rt.tv_sec < 0)
> return ETIMEDOUT;
>
> - /* Wait until thread terminates. The kernel so far does not use
> - the private futex operations for this. */
> + /* If *tidp == tid, wait until thread terminates or the wait times out.
> + The kernel to version 3.16.3 does not use the private futex
> + operations for futex wake-up when the clone terminates.
> + */
> if (lll_futex_timed_wait (tidp, tid, &rt, LLL_SHARED) == -ETIMEDOUT)
> return ETIMEDOUT;
> }
> diff --git a/nptl/lowlevelrobustlock.c b/nptl/lowlevelrobustlock.c
> index 3525807..2f4f314 100644
> --- a/nptl/lowlevelrobustlock.c
> +++ b/nptl/lowlevelrobustlock.c
> @@ -36,14 +36,17 @@ __lll_robust_lock_wait (int *futex, int private)
>
> do
> {
> + /* If the owner died, return the present value of the futex. */
> if (__glibc_unlikely (oldval & FUTEX_OWNER_DIED))
> return oldval;
>
> + /* Attempt to put lock into state 'acquired, possibly with waiters'. */
> int newval = oldval | FUTEX_WAITERS;
> if (oldval != newval
> && atomic_compare_and_exchange_bool_acq (futex, newval, oldval))
> continue;
>
> + /* If *futex == 2, wait until woken. */
> lll_futex_wait (futex, newval, private);
>
> try:
> @@ -100,15 +103,17 @@ __lll_robust_timedlock_wait (int *futex, const struct timespec *abstime,
> return ETIMEDOUT;
> #endif
>
> - /* Wait. */
> + /* If the owner died, return the present value of the futex. */
> if (__glibc_unlikely (oldval & FUTEX_OWNER_DIED))
> return oldval;
>
> + /* Attempt to put lock into state 'acquired, possibly with waiters'. */
> int newval = oldval | FUTEX_WAITERS;
> if (oldval != newval
> && atomic_compare_and_exchange_bool_acq (futex, newval, oldval))
> continue;
>
> + /* If *futex == 2, wait until woken or timeout. */
> #if (!defined __ASSUME_FUTEX_CLOCK_REALTIME \
> || !defined lll_futex_timed_wait_bitset)
> lll_futex_timed_wait (futex, newval, &rt, private);
> diff --git a/sysdeps/nptl/lowlevellock.h b/sysdeps/nptl/lowlevellock.h
> index 28f4ba3..8f6e270 100644
> --- a/sysdeps/nptl/lowlevellock.h
> +++ b/sysdeps/nptl/lowlevellock.h
> @@ -22,9 +22,53 @@
> #include <atomic.h>
> #include <lowlevellock-futex.h>
>
> +/* Low-level locks use a combination of atomic operations (to acquire and
> + release lock ownership) and futex operations (to block until the state
> + of a lock changes). A lock can be in one of three states:
> + 0: not acquired,
> + 1: acquired with no waiters; no other threads are blocked or about to block
> + for changes to the lock state,
> + >1: acquired, possibly with waiters; there may be other threads blocked or
> + about to block for changes to the lock state.
> +
> + We expect that the common case is an uncontended lock, so we just need
> + to transition the lock between states 0 and 1; releasing the lock does
> + not need to wake any other blocked threads. If the lock is contended
> + and a thread decides to block using a futex operation, then this thread
> + needs to first change the state to >1; if this state is observed during
> + lock release, the releasing thread will wake one of the potentially
> + blocked threads.
> +
> + Much of this code takes a 'private' parameter. This may be:
> + LLL_PRIVATE: lock only shared within a process
> + LLL_SHARED: lock may be shared across processes.
> +
> + Condition variables contain an optimization for broadcasts that requeues
> + waiting threads on a lock's futex. Therefore, there is a special
> + variant of the locks (whose name contains "cond") that makes sure to
> + always set the lock state to >1 and not just 1.
> +
> + Robust locks set the lock to the id of the owner. This allows detection
> + of the case where the owner exits without releasing the lock. Flags are
> + OR'd with the owner id to record additional information about lock state.
> + Therefore the states of robust locks are:
> + 0: not acquired
> + id: acquired (by user identified by id & FUTEX_TID_MASK)
> +
> + The following flags may be set in the robust lock value:
> + FUTEX_WAITERS - possibly has waiters
> + FUTEX_OWNER_DIED - owning user has exited without releasing the futex. */
> +
> +
> +/* If LOCK is 0 (not acquired), set to 1 (acquired) and return 0. Otherwise
> + leave lock unchanged and return non-zero to indicate that the lock was not
> + acquired. */
> #define lll_trylock(lock) \
> atomic_compare_and_exchange_bool_acq (&(lock), 1, 0)
>
> +/* If LOCK is 0 (not acquired), set to 2 (acquired, possibly with waiters) and
> + return 0. Otherwise leave lock unchanged and return non-zero to indicate
> + that the lock was not acquired. */
> #define lll_cond_trylock(lock) \
> atomic_compare_and_exchange_bool_acq (&(lock), 2, 0)
>
> @@ -35,6 +79,13 @@ extern int __lll_robust_lock_wait (int *futex, int private) attribute_hidden;
> /* This is an expression rather than a statement even though its value is
> void, so that it can be used in a comma expression or as an expression
> that's cast to void. */
> +/* The inner conditional compiles to a call to __lll_lock_wait_private if
> + private is known at compile time to be LLL_PRIVATE, and to a call to
> + __lll_lock_wait otherwise. */
> +/* If FUTEX is 0 (not acquired), set to 1 (acquired with no waiters) and
> + return. Otherwise block until we acquire the lock, at which point FUTEX is
> + 2 (acquired, possibly with waiters), then return. The lock is aways
> + acquired on return. */
> #define __lll_lock(futex, private) \
> ((void) \
> ({ \
> @@ -52,6 +103,14 @@ extern int __lll_robust_lock_wait (int *futex, int private) attribute_hidden;
> __lll_lock (&(futex), private)
>
>
> +/* If FUTEX is 0 (not acquired), set to ID (acquired with no waiters) and
> + return 0. Otherwise, block until either:
> + 1) We acquire the lock, at which point FUTEX will be ID | FUTEX_WAITERS
> + (acquired, possibly with waiters), then return 0.
> + 2) The previous owner of the lock dies. FUTEX will be the value of id as
> + set by the previous owner, with FUTEX_OWNER_DIED set (FUTEX_WAITERS may
> + also be set). Return this value to indicate that the lock is not
> + acquired. */
> #define __lll_robust_lock(futex, id, private) \
> ({ \
> int *__futex = (futex); \
> @@ -69,6 +128,12 @@ extern int __lll_robust_lock_wait (int *futex, int private) attribute_hidden;
> /* This is an expression rather than a statement even though its value is
> void, so that it can be used in a comma expression or as an expression
> that's cast to void. */
> +/* Unconditionally set FUTEX to 2 (acquired, possibly with waiters). condvar
> + locks only have 'not acquired' and 'acquired, possibly with waiters' states,
> + so there is no need to check FUTEX before setting.
> + If FUTEX was 0 (not acquired) then return. Otherwise, block until the lock
> + is acquired, at which point FUTEX is 2 (acquired, possibly with waiters).
> + The lock is always acquired on return. */
> #define __lll_cond_lock(futex, private) \
> ((void) \
> ({ \
> @@ -79,6 +144,14 @@ extern int __lll_robust_lock_wait (int *futex, int private) attribute_hidden;
> #define lll_cond_lock(futex, private) __lll_cond_lock (&(futex), private)
>
>
> +/* If FUTEX is 0 (not acquired), set to ID | FUTEX_WAITERS (acquired, possibly
> + with waiters) and return 0. Otherwise, block until either:
> + 1) We acquire the lock, at which point FUTEX will be ID | FUTEX_WAITERS
> + (acquired, possibly with waiters), then return 0.
> + 2) The previous owner of the lock dies. FUTEX will be the value of id as
> + set by the previous owner, with FUTEX_OWNER_DIED set (FUTEX_WAITERS may
> + also be set). Return this value to indicate that the lock is not
> + acquired. */
> #define lll_robust_cond_lock(futex, id, private) \
> __lll_robust_lock (&(futex), (id) | FUTEX_WAITERS, private)
>
> @@ -88,8 +161,9 @@ extern int __lll_timedlock_wait (int *futex, const struct timespec *,
> extern int __lll_robust_timedlock_wait (int *futex, const struct timespec *,
> int private) attribute_hidden;
>
> -/* Take futex if it is untaken.
> - Otherwise block until either we get the futex or abstime runs out. */
> +
> +/* As __lll_lock, but with a timeout. If the timeout occurs then return
> + ETIMEDOUT. If ABSTIME is invalid, return EINVAL. */
> #define __lll_timedlock(futex, abstime, private) \
> ({ \
> int *__futex = (futex); \
> @@ -104,6 +178,8 @@ extern int __lll_robust_timedlock_wait (int *futex, const struct timespec *,
> __lll_timedlock (&(futex), abstime, private)
>
>
> +/* As __lll_robust_lock, but with a timeout. If the timeout occurs then return
> + ETIMEDOUT. If ABSTIME is invalid, return EINVAL. */
> #define __lll_robust_timedlock(futex, abstime, id, private) \
> ({ \
> int *__futex = (futex); \
> @@ -121,6 +197,9 @@ extern int __lll_robust_timedlock_wait (int *futex, const struct timespec *,
> /* This is an expression rather than a statement even though its value is
> void, so that it can be used in a comma expression or as an expression
> that's cast to void. */
> +/* Unconditionally set FUTEX to 0 (not acquired), releasing the lock. If FUTEX
> + was >1 (acquired, possibly with waiters), then wake any waiters. The waiter
> + who acquires the lock will set FUTEX to >1. */
> #define __lll_unlock(futex, private) \
> ((void) \
> ({ \
> @@ -136,6 +215,9 @@ extern int __lll_robust_timedlock_wait (int *futex, const struct timespec *,
> /* This is an expression rather than a statement even though its value is
> void, so that it can be used in a comma expression or as an expression
> that's cast to void. */
> +/* Unconditionally set FUTEX to 0 (not acquired), releasing the lock. If FUTEX
> + had FUTEX_WAITERS set then wake any waiters. The waiter who acquires the
> + lock will set FUTEX_WAITERS. */
> #define __lll_robust_unlock(futex, private) \
> ((void) \
> ({ \
> @@ -159,15 +241,12 @@ extern int __lll_robust_timedlock_wait (int *futex, const struct timespec *,
> #define LLL_LOCK_INITIALIZER (0)
> #define LLL_LOCK_INITIALIZER_LOCKED (1)
>
> -/* The states of a lock are:
> - 0 - untaken
> - 1 - taken by one user
> - >1 - taken by more users */
>
> /* The kernel notifies a process which uses CLONE_CHILD_CLEARTID via futex
> - wakeup when the clone terminates. The memory location contains the
> - thread ID while the clone is running and is reset to zero
> - afterwards. */
> + wake-up when the clone terminates. The memory location contains the
> + thread ID while the clone is running and is reset to zero by the kernel
> + afterwards. The kernel up to version 3.16.3 does not use the private futex
> + operations for futex wake-up when the clone terminates. */
> #define lll_wait_tid(tid) \
> do { \
> __typeof (tid) __tid; \
> @@ -178,6 +257,8 @@ extern int __lll_robust_timedlock_wait (int *futex, const struct timespec *,
> extern int __lll_timedwait_tid (int *, const struct timespec *)
> attribute_hidden;
>
> +/* As lll_wait_tid, but with a timeout. If the timeout occurs then return
> + ETIMEDOUT. If ABSTIME is invalid, return EINVAL. */
> #define lll_timedwait_tid(tid, abstime) \
> ({ \
> int __res = 0; \