]> git.ipfire.org Git - thirdparty/kernel/stable.git/blame - Documentation/atomic_t.txt
sky2: Disable MSI on ASUS P6T
[thirdparty/kernel/stable.git] / Documentation / atomic_t.txt
CommitLineData
706eeb3e
PZ
1
2On atomic types (atomic_t atomic64_t and atomic_long_t).
3
4The atomic type provides an interface to the architecture's means of atomic
5RMW operations between CPUs (atomic operations on MMIO are not supported and
6can lead to fatal traps on some platforms).
7
8API
9---
10
11The 'full' API consists of (atomic64_ and atomic_long_ prefixes omitted for
12brevity):
13
14Non-RMW ops:
15
16 atomic_read(), atomic_set()
17 atomic_read_acquire(), atomic_set_release()
18
19
20RMW atomic operations:
21
22Arithmetic:
23
24 atomic_{add,sub,inc,dec}()
25 atomic_{add,sub,inc,dec}_return{,_relaxed,_acquire,_release}()
26 atomic_fetch_{add,sub,inc,dec}{,_relaxed,_acquire,_release}()
27
28
29Bitwise:
30
31 atomic_{and,or,xor,andnot}()
32 atomic_fetch_{and,or,xor,andnot}{,_relaxed,_acquire,_release}()
33
34
35Swap:
36
37 atomic_xchg{,_relaxed,_acquire,_release}()
38 atomic_cmpxchg{,_relaxed,_acquire,_release}()
39 atomic_try_cmpxchg{,_relaxed,_acquire,_release}()
40
41
42Reference count (but please see refcount_t):
43
44 atomic_add_unless(), atomic_inc_not_zero()
45 atomic_sub_and_test(), atomic_dec_and_test()
46
47
48Misc:
49
50 atomic_inc_and_test(), atomic_add_negative()
51 atomic_dec_unless_positive(), atomic_inc_unless_negative()
52
53
54Barriers:
55
56 smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic()
57
58
59
60SEMANTICS
61---------
62
63Non-RMW ops:
64
65The non-RMW ops are (typically) regular LOADs and STOREs and are canonically
66implemented using READ_ONCE(), WRITE_ONCE(), smp_load_acquire() and
67smp_store_release() respectively.
68
69The one detail to this is that atomic_set{}() should be observable to the RMW
70ops. That is:
71
72 C atomic-set
73
74 {
75 atomic_set(v, 1);
76 }
77
78 P1(atomic_t *v)
79 {
80 atomic_add_unless(v, 1, 0);
81 }
82
83 P2(atomic_t *v)
84 {
85 atomic_set(v, 0);
86 }
87
88 exists
89 (v=2)
90
91In this case we would expect the atomic_set() from CPU1 to either happen
92before the atomic_add_unless(), in which case that latter one would no-op, or
93_after_ in which case we'd overwrite its result. In no case is "2" a valid
94outcome.
95
96This is typically true on 'normal' platforms, where a regular competing STORE
97will invalidate a LL/SC or fail a CMPXCHG.
98
99The obvious case where this is not so is when we need to implement atomic ops
100with a lock:
101
102 CPU0 CPU1
103
104 atomic_add_unless(v, 1, 0);
105 lock();
106 ret = READ_ONCE(v->counter); // == 1
107 atomic_set(v, 0);
108 if (ret != u) WRITE_ONCE(v->counter, 0);
109 WRITE_ONCE(v->counter, ret + 1);
110 unlock();
111
112the typical solution is to then implement atomic_set{}() with atomic_xchg().
113
114
115RMW ops:
116
117These come in various forms:
118
119 - plain operations without return value: atomic_{}()
120
121 - operations which return the modified value: atomic_{}_return()
122
123 these are limited to the arithmetic operations because those are
124 reversible. Bitops are irreversible and therefore the modified value
125 is of dubious utility.
126
127 - operations which return the original value: atomic_fetch_{}()
128
129 - swap operations: xchg(), cmpxchg() and try_cmpxchg()
130
131 - misc; the special purpose operations that are commonly used and would,
132 given the interface, normally be implemented using (try_)cmpxchg loops but
133 are time critical and can, (typically) on LL/SC architectures, be more
134 efficiently implemented.
135
136All these operations are SMP atomic; that is, the operations (for a single
137atomic variable) can be fully ordered and no intermediate state is lost or
138visible.
139
140
141ORDERING (go read memory-barriers.txt first)
142--------
143
144The rule of thumb:
145
146 - non-RMW operations are unordered;
147
148 - RMW operations that have no return value are unordered;
149
150 - RMW operations that have a return value are fully ordered;
151
152 - RMW operations that are conditional are unordered on FAILURE,
153 otherwise the above rules apply.
154
155Except of course when an operation has an explicit ordering like:
156
157 {}_relaxed: unordered
158 {}_acquire: the R of the RMW (or atomic_read) is an ACQUIRE
159 {}_release: the W of the RMW (or atomic_set) is a RELEASE
160
161Where 'unordered' is against other memory locations. Address dependencies are
162not defeated.
163
164Fully ordered primitives are ordered against everything prior and everything
165subsequent. Therefore a fully ordered primitive is like having an smp_mb()
166before and an smp_mb() after the primitive.
167
168
169The barriers:
170
171 smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic()
172
173only apply to the RMW ops and can be used to augment/upgrade the ordering
174inherent to the used atomic op. These barriers provide a full smp_mb().
175
176These helper barriers exist because architectures have varying implicit
177ordering on their SMP atomic primitives. For example our TSO architectures
178provide full ordered atomics and these barriers are no-ops.
179
380ca130
PZ
180NOTE: when the atomic RmW ops are fully ordered, they should also imply a
181compiler barrier.
182
706eeb3e
PZ
183Thus:
184
185 atomic_fetch_add();
186
187is equivalent to:
188
189 smp_mb__before_atomic();
190 atomic_fetch_add_relaxed();
191 smp_mb__after_atomic();
192
193However the atomic_fetch_add() might be implemented more efficiently.
194
195Further, while something like:
196
197 smp_mb__before_atomic();
198 atomic_dec(&X);
199
200is a 'typical' RELEASE pattern, the barrier is strictly stronger than
201a RELEASE. Similarly for something like:
202
ca110694
PZ
203 atomic_inc(&X);
204 smp_mb__after_atomic();
205
206is an ACQUIRE pattern (though very much not typical), but again the barrier is
207strictly stronger than ACQUIRE. As illustrated:
208
209 C strong-acquire
210
211 {
212 }
213
214 P1(int *x, atomic_t *y)
215 {
216 r0 = READ_ONCE(*x);
217 smp_rmb();
218 r1 = atomic_read(y);
219 }
220
221 P2(int *x, atomic_t *y)
222 {
223 atomic_inc(y);
224 smp_mb__after_atomic();
225 WRITE_ONCE(*x, 1);
226 }
227
228 exists
229 (r0=1 /\ r1=0)
230
231This should not happen; but a hypothetical atomic_inc_acquire() --
232(void)atomic_fetch_inc_acquire() for instance -- would allow the outcome,
233since then:
234
235 P1 P2
236
237 t = LL.acq *y (0)
238 t++;
239 *x = 1;
240 r0 = *x (1)
241 RMB
242 r1 = *y (0)
243 SC *y, t;
706eeb3e 244
ca110694 245is allowed.