-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
- Loading branch information
Showing
1 changed file
with
105 additions
and
0 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ | ||
- Feature Name: integer_atomics | ||
- Start Date: 2016-03-14 | ||
- RFC PR: (leave this empty) | ||
- Rust Issue: (leave this empty) | ||
|
||
# Summary | ||
[summary]: #summary | ||
|
||
This RFC basically changes `core::sync::atomic` to look like this: | ||
|
||
```rust | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "8")] | ||
struct AtomicBool {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "8")] | ||
struct AtomicI8 {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "8")] | ||
struct AtomicU8 {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "16")] | ||
struct AtomicI16 {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "16")] | ||
struct AtomicU16 {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "32")] | ||
struct AtomicI32 {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "32")] | ||
struct AtomicU32 {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "64")] | ||
struct AtomicI64 {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "64")] | ||
struct AtomicU64 {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "128")] | ||
struct AtomicI128 {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "128")] | ||
struct AtomicU128 {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "ptr")] | ||
struct AtomicIsize {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "ptr")] | ||
struct AtomicUsize {} | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "ptr")] | ||
struct AtomicPtr<T> {} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
# Motivation | ||
[motivation]: #motivation | ||
|
||
Many lock-free algorithms require a two-value `compare_exchange`, which is effectively twice the size of a `usize`. This would be implemented by atomically swapping a struct containing two members. | ||
|
||
Another use case is to support Linux's futex API. This API is based on atomic `i32` variables, which currently aren't available on x86_64 because `AtomicIsize` is 64-bit. | ||
|
||
# Detailed design | ||
[design]: #detailed-design | ||
|
||
## New atomic types | ||
|
||
The `AtomicI8`, `AtomicI16`, `AtomicI32`, `AtomicI64` and `AtomicI128` types are added along with their matching `AtomicU*` type. These have the same API as the existing `AtomicIsize` and `AtomicUsize` types. Note that support for 128-bit atomics is dependent on the [i128/u128 RFC](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1504) being accepted. | ||
|
||
## Target support | ||
|
||
One problem is that it is hard for a user to determine if a certain type `T` can be placed inside an `Atomic<T>`. After a quick survey of the LLVM and Clang code, architectures can be classified into 3 categories: | ||
|
||
- The architecture does not support any form of atomics (mainly microcontroller architectures). | ||
- The architecture supports all atomic operations for integers from i8 to iN (where N is the architecture word/pointer size). | ||
- The architecture supports all atomic operations for integers from i8 to i(N*2). | ||
|
||
A new target cfg is added: `target_has_atomic`. It will have multiple values, one for each atomic size supported by the target. For example: | ||
|
||
```rust | ||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "128")] | ||
static ATOMIC: AtomicU128 = AtomicU128::new(mem::transmute((0u64, 0u64))); | ||
#[cfg(not(target_has_atomic = "128"))] | ||
static ATOMIC: Mutex<(u64, u64)> = Mutex::new((0, 0)); | ||
|
||
#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "64")] | ||
static COUNTER: AtomicU64 = AtomicU64::new(0); | ||
#[cfg(not(target_has_atomic = "64"))] | ||
static COUTNER: AtomicU32 = AtomicU32::new(0); | ||
``` | ||
|
||
Note that it is not necessary for an architecture to natively support atomic operations for all sizes (`i8`, `i16`, etc) as long as it is able to perform a `compare_exchange` operation with a larger size. All smaller operations can be emulated using that. For example a byte atomic can be emulated by using a `compare_exchange` loop that only modifies a single byte of the value. This is actually how LLVM implements byte-level atomics on MIPS, which only supports word-sized atomics native. Note that the out-of-bounds read is fine here because atomics are aligned and will never cross a page boundary. Since this transformation is performed transparently by LLVM, we do not need to do any extra work to support this. | ||
|
||
## Changes to `AtomicPtr`, `AtomicIsize` and `AtomicUsize` | ||
|
||
These types will have a `#[cfg(target_has_atomic = "ptr")]` bound added to them. Although these types are stable, this isn't a breaking change because all targets currently supported by Rust will have this type available. This would only affect custom targets, which currently fail to link due to missing compiler-rt symbols anyways. | ||
|
||
## Changes to `AtomicBool` | ||
|
||
This type will be changes to use an `AtomicU8` internally instead of an `AtomicUsize`, which will allow it to be safely transmuted to a `bool`. This will make it more consistent with the other atomic types that have the same layout as their underlying type. (For example futex code will assume that a `&AtomicI32` can be passed as a `&i32` to the system call) | ||
|
||
# Drawbacks | ||
[drawbacks]: #drawbacks | ||
|
||
Having certain atomic types get enabled/disable based on the target isn't very nice, but it's unavoidable because support for atomic operations is very architecture-specific. | ||
|
||
This approach doesn't directly support for atomic operations on user-defined structs, but this can be emulated using transmutes. | ||
|
||
# Alternatives | ||
[alternatives]: #alternatives | ||
|
||
One alternative that was discussed in a [previous RFC](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1505) was to add a generic `Atomic<T>` type. However the consensus was that having unsupported atomic types either fail at monomorphization time or fall back to lock-based implementations was undesirable. | ||
|
||
Several other designs have been suggested [here](https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/pre-rfc-extended-atomic-types/3068). | ||
|
||
# Unresolved questions | ||
[unresolved]: #unresolved-questions | ||
|
||
None |