Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming > #1718
| From | "aminer" <aminer@videotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.programming.threads, comp.programming |
| Subject | Re: About lockfree_mpmc ... |
| Date | 2012-06-03 15:19 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <jqgdc0$keo$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <jqgc52$d1h$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
Hello again, Sorry, as you have noticied there is loads on setObject(lastTail,tm) between line [2] and line [4]. And loads are not reordered with older loads on x86 So i think there is no problem with lockfree_mpmc. Thank you. Amine Moulay Ramdne "aminer" <aminer@videotron.ca> wrote in message news:jqgc52$d1h$1@dont-email.me... > > Hello, > > I think i have forgot something with lockfree_mpmc... > > Please follow with me... > > The Intel x86 memory model, detailed in Intel 64 Architecture Memory > Ordering White Paper > and the AMD spec, AMD64 Architecture Programmer's Manual, list a lot of > memory ordering > guarantees, among them: > Loads are not reordered with other loads. > Stores are not reordered with other stores. > Stores are not reordered with older loads. > In a multiprocessor system, memory ordering obeys causality (memory > ordering respects transitive visibility). > In a multiprocessor system, stores to the same location have a total > order. > In a multiprocessor system, locked instructions have a total order. > Loads and stores are not reordered with locked instructions. > > But since on x86 Loads may be reordered with older stores to different > locations > > > So please take a look at the following lockfree_mpmc code: > > --- > > function TLockfree_MPMC.push(tm : tNodeQueue):boolean; > var lasttail,newtemp:long; > i,j:integer; > begin > > if getlength >= fsize > then > begin > result:=false; > exit; > end; > result:=true; > > [1]newTemp:=LockedIncLong(temp); > > [2] lastTail:=newTemp-1; > setObject(lastTail,tm); > > [3] > > repeat > > [4] if CAS(tail,lasttail,newtemp) > then > begin > exit; > end; > sleep(0); > until false; > > end; > --- > > > So the the loads of lasttail and newtemp in [4] line can be reordered > with older stores of lastail and newtemp in [1] [2], so in this case must > i insert an mfence in line [3] to respect the logic of the program?... > > > > Thank you, > Amine Moulay Ramdane. > > >
Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar
About lockfree_mpmc ... "aminer" <aminer@videotron.ca> - 2012-06-03 14:58 -0500 Re: About lockfree_mpmc ... "aminer" <aminer@videotron.ca> - 2012-06-03 15:19 -0500
csiph-web