mirror of https://github.com/xqemu/xqemu.git
docs/atomics: update atomic_read/set comparison with Linux
Recently Linux did a mass conversion of its atomic_read/set calls so that they at least are READ/WRITE_ONCE. See Linux's commit 62e8a325 ("atomic, arch: Audit atomic_{read,set}()"). It seems though that their documentation hasn't been updated to reflect this. The appended updates our documentation to reflect the change, which means there is effectively no difference between our atomic_read/set and the current Linux implementation. While at it, fix the statement that a barrier is implied by atomic_read/set, which is incorrect. Volatile/atomic semantics prevent transformations pertaining the variable they apply to; this, however, has no effect on surrounding statements like barriers do. For more details on this, see: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Volatiles.html Signed-off-by: Emilio G. Cota <cota@braap.org> Message-Id: <1464120374-8950-2-git-send-email-cota@braap.org> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
141af038dd
commit
56ebe02203
|
@ -326,9 +326,19 @@ and memory barriers, and the equivalents in QEMU:
|
||||||
use a boxed atomic_t type; atomic operations in QEMU are polymorphic
|
use a boxed atomic_t type; atomic operations in QEMU are polymorphic
|
||||||
and use normal C types.
|
and use normal C types.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- atomic_read and atomic_set in Linux give no guarantee at all;
|
- Originally, atomic_read and atomic_set in Linux gave no guarantee
|
||||||
atomic_read and atomic_set in QEMU include a compiler barrier
|
at all. Linux 4.1 updated them to implement volatile
|
||||||
(similar to the READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE macros in Linux).
|
semantics via ACCESS_ONCE (or the more recent READ/WRITE_ONCE).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
QEMU's atomic_read/set implement, if the compiler supports it, C11
|
||||||
|
atomic relaxed semantics, and volatile semantics otherwise.
|
||||||
|
Both semantics prevent the compiler from doing certain transformations;
|
||||||
|
the difference is that atomic accesses are guaranteed to be atomic,
|
||||||
|
while volatile accesses aren't. Thus, in the volatile case we just cross
|
||||||
|
our fingers hoping that the compiler will generate atomic accesses,
|
||||||
|
since we assume the variables passed are machine-word sized and
|
||||||
|
properly aligned.
|
||||||
|
No barriers are implied by atomic_read/set in either Linux or QEMU.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- most atomic read-modify-write operations in Linux return void;
|
- most atomic read-modify-write operations in Linux return void;
|
||||||
in QEMU, all of them return the old value of the variable.
|
in QEMU, all of them return the old value of the variable.
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue