While testing BIND 9 on arm64 8+ core machine, it was discovered that
the weak variants in fact does spuriously fail, we haven't observed that
on other architectures.
This commit replaces all non-loop usage of atomic_compare_exchange_weak
with atomic_compare_exchange_strong.
The memory ordering in the rwlock was all wrong, I am copying excerpts
from the https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/atomic/memory_order#Relaxed_ordering
for the convenience of the reader:
Relaxed ordering
Atomic operations tagged memory_order_relaxed are not synchronization
operations; they do not impose an order among concurrent memory
accesses. They only guarantee atomicity and modification order
consistency.
Release-Acquire ordering
If an atomic store in thread A is tagged memory_order_release and an
atomic load in thread B from the same variable is tagged
memory_order_acquire, all memory writes (non-atomic and relaxed atomic)
that happened-before the atomic store from the point of view of thread
A, become visible side-effects in thread B. That is, once the atomic
load is completed, thread B is guaranteed to see everything thread A
wrote to memory.
The synchronization is established only between the threads releasing
and acquiring the same atomic variable. Other threads can see different
order of memory accesses than either or both of the synchronized
threads.
Which basically means that we had no or weak synchronization between
threads using the same variables in the rwlock structure. There should
not be a significant performance drop because the critical sections were
already protected by:
while(1) {
if (relaxed_atomic_operation) {
break;
}
LOCK(lock);
if (!relaxed_atomic_operation) {
WAIT(sem, lock);
}
UNLOCK(lock)l
}
I would add one more thing to "Don't do your own crypto, folks.":
- Also don't do your own locking, folks.
The change fixes the following build failure on sparc T3 and older CPUs:
```
sparc-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc ... -O2 -mcpu=niagara2 ... -c rwlock.c
{standard input}: Assembler messages:
{standard input}:398: Error: Architecture mismatch on "pause ".
{standard input}:398: (Requires v9e|v9v|v9m|m8; requested architecture is v9b.)
make[1]: *** [Makefile:280: rwlock.o] Error 1
```
`pause` insutruction exists only on `-mcpu=niagara4` (`T4`) and upper.
The change adds `pause` configure-time autodetection and uses it if available.
config.h.in got new `HAVE_SPARC_PAUSE` knob. Fallback is a fall-through no-op.
Build-tested on:
- sparc-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc (no `pause`, build succeeds)
- sparc-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -mcpu=niagara4 (`pause`, build succeeds)
Reported-by: Rolf Eike Beer
Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/691708
Signed-off-by: Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@gentoo.org>
The ThreadSanitizer found several possible data races in our rwlock
implementation. This commit changes all the unprotected variables to atomic and
also changes the explicit memory ordering (atomic_<foo>_explicit(..., <order>)
functions to use our convenience macros (atomic_<foo>_<order>).
The stock toolchain available on CentOS 6 for i386 is unable to use the
_mm_pause() intrinsic. Fix by using "rep; nop" assembly instructions on
that platform instead.
