Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 26 Aug 2022 13:10:39 -0400 | From | Alan Stern <> | Subject | Re: "Verifying and Optimizing Compact NUMA-Aware Locks on Weak Memory Models" |
| |
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 06:23:24PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 05:48:12AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Hello! > > > > I have not yet done more than glance at this one, but figured I should > > send it along sooner rather than later. > > > > "Verifying and Optimizing Compact NUMA-Aware Locks on Weak > > Memory Models", Antonio Paolillo, Hernán Ponce-de-León, Thomas > > Haas, Diogo Behrens, Rafael Chehab, Ming Fu, and Roland Meyer. > > https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.15240 > > > > The claim is that the queued spinlocks implementation with CNA violates > > LKMM but actually works on all architectures having a formal hardware > > memory model. > > > > Thoughts? > > So the paper mentions the following defects: > > - LKMM doesn't carry a release-acquire chain across a relaxed op
That's right, although I'm not so sure this should be considered a defect...
> - some babbling about a missing propagation -- ISTR Linux if stuffed > full of them, specifically we require stores to auto propagate > without help from barriers
Not a missing propagation; a late one.
Don't understand what you mean by "auto propagate without help from barriers".
> - some handoff that is CNA specific and I've not looked too hard at > presently. > > > I think we should address that first one in LKMM, it seems very weird to > me a RmW would break the chain like that.
An explicitly relaxed RMW (atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed(), to be precise).
If the authors wanted to keep the release-acquire chain intact, why not use a cmpxchg version that has release semantics instead of going out of their way to use a relaxed version?
To put it another way, RMW accesses and release-acquire accesses are unrelated concepts. You can have one without the other (in principle, anyway). So a relaxed RMW is just as capable of breaking a release-acquire chain as any other relaxed operation is.
> Is there actual hardware that > doesn't behave?
Not as far as I know, although that isn't very far. Certainly an other-multicopy-atomic architecture would make the litmus test succeed. But the LKMM does not require other-multicopy-atomicity.
Alan
| |