Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types

From	Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com>
Newsgroups	comp.unix.programmer
Subject	Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types
Date	2011-06-16 22:11 +0100
Message-ID	<87boxx7a7z.fsf@sapphire.mobileactivedefense.com> (permalink)
References	(8 earlier) <e389f163-ab53-433a-b3db-95761c349ed5@f31g2000pri.googlegroups.com> <87d3ipy94h.fsf@sapphire.mobileactivedefense.com> <17a4bc52-a36b-4451-8715-c56eca0efc4a@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com> <871uz13ctc.fsf@sapphire.mobileactivedefense.com> <1913c64a-d2d2-42c4-b4eb-11855e54b158@r27g2000prr.googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> writes:
> On Jun 10, 8:50 am, Rainer Weikusat <rweiku...@mssgmbh.com> wrote:
>
>> > I admit that it might be theoretically possible to create such a
>> > threading standard. But to my knowledge, no such threading standard
>> > exists for very good reasons -- performance would be awful.
>
>> I do not quite understand why 'performance would be awful' just
>> because source-code level read accesses to some objects must have a
>> 1:1 correspondence with such accesses in the generated machine code.
>
> It wouldn't just be "some objects", it would be effectively all
> objects. Many applications work such that the majority of their data
> can be worked on by more than one thread.

For as long as there are not n threads working on the same data in
parallell (eg, 2 threads using a lockless ring buffer implemented with
the help of __sync_synchronize of whatever architecture-specific
memory barrier instructions are available), there shouldn't be any
issues caused by the running code not evaluating every object access
which happened to be in the source code. 'volatile' really just
changes the C expression evaluation rules and nothing else. Using
another contrived example, it communicates that, given an object
defined as

	int a;

completely evaluating a + a might yield a different result than just
doing a << 1 instead would.

[...]

> In practice, 'volatile' has no use for threading.

Provided that multi-threaded programs are written in C, the expression
evaluated by their threads are evaluated according to the same rules
which always apply to that and consequently, the same changes to these
rules might be needed for the same reasons as in the single-threaded
case. Technically, all C programs are theoretically multi-threaded
because of the existence of signal handlers, which provide classic
'preemptive multitasking' by  multiplexing a single 'execution
resource' among multiple 'code streams' based on specific events (such
as 'a specific amount of time has passed'). 

> It's not necessary, it's not sufficient, it's not practical to
> determine where you need it and where you don't, and it saps
> performance for no benefit.

First and foremost IT IS NOT AN INTER-THREAD SYNCHRONIZATION PRIMITVE OF ANY
SHAPE, SIZE OR COLOUR, dammit. It cannot be that difficult to
understand a simple fact like that ...

Thread

threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Urs Thuermann <urs@isnogud.escape.de> - 2011-05-31 21:07 +0200
  Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Xavier Roche <xroche@free.fr.NOSPAM.invalid> - 2011-05-31 22:44 +0200
    Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-01 11:58 +0100
      Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Xavier Roche <xroche@free.fr.NOSPAM.invalid> - 2011-06-01 14:15 +0200
        Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Xavier Roche <xroche@free.fr.NOSPAM.invalid> - 2011-06-02 13:49 +0200
          Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-02 13:40 +0100
  Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-05-31 22:50 +0100
  Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-05-31 21:32 -0400
    Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-01 12:35 +0100
      Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-06-01 23:01 -0400
        Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-02 11:22 +0100
          Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-06-02 07:52 -0400
            Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-02 13:38 +0100
              Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-06-02 21:27 -0400
  Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-06-01 12:55 -0700
    Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-01 22:54 +0100
      Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Alex Fraser <me@privacy.net> - 2011-06-02 21:00 +0100
        Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-06-04 21:53 -0700
          Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-05 16:39 +0100
            Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-06-06 18:48 -0700
              Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-07 06:50 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-06-07 06:04 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-07 22:48 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-07 23:18 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types gordonb.lhpq6@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2011-06-07 18:28 -0500
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-08 11:09 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-08 14:32 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-06-09 18:10 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-10 15:26 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types James Waldby <not@valid.invalid> - 2011-06-10 16:49 +0000
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-10 19:07 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-10 13:13 -0700
              Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-07 12:55 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-06-07 06:02 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-07 16:05 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-07 13:37 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2011-06-14 21:43 +0000
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-15 03:07 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-15 10:22 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Casper H.S. Dik <Casper.Dik@OrSPaMcle.COM> - 2011-06-15 09:40 +0000
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-15 13:20 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Casper H.S. Dik <Casper.Dik@OrSPaMcle.COM> - 2011-06-15 13:19 +0000
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-15 17:41 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-06-15 20:20 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-15 17:31 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-15 18:31 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-15 13:32 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-15 22:19 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-16 05:02 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-14 23:23 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-15 10:12 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-15 02:53 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-06-08 10:19 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-10 16:50 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-06-15 20:24 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-16 22:11 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-17 04:43 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> - 2011-06-19 01:43 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-19 13:35 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-19 17:06 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2011-06-20 16:22 +0000
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-20 19:16 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2011-06-21 17:30 +0000
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-21 13:02 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 14:32 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2011-06-21 17:05 +0000
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-19 17:01 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> - 2011-06-22 01:55 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-22 03:36 -0700
      Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-06-02 21:53 -0700
      Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> - 2011-06-03 04:24 -0700
      Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-06-03 07:52 -0400
  Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types "Ersek, Laszlo" <lacos@caesar.elte.hu> - 2011-06-02 00:23 +0200
    Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 20:11 -0700
      Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types "Ersek, Laszlo" <lacos@caesar.elte.hu> - 2011-06-02 22:54 +0200
        Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 14:03 -0700
          Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types "Ersek, Laszlo" <lacos@caesar.elte.hu> - 2011-06-03 02:49 +0200
            Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 17:54 -0700
              Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-06-02 21:36 -0400
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-03 16:25 +0100
            Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types "Ersek, Laszlo" <lacos@caesar.elte.hu> - 2011-06-03 03:12 +0200
  Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types "Ersek, Laszlo" <lacos@caesar.elte.hu> - 2011-06-02 00:45 +0200
    Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-02 11:26 +0100
      Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Alex Fraser <me@privacy.net> - 2011-06-02 21:05 +0100
  Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 20:21 -0700
    Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-02 11:31 +0100
      Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 09:12 -0700
        Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-02 17:54 +0100
          Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 14:00 -0700
            Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-03 15:19 +0100
              Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-03 15:50 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-05 16:46 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-05 15:28 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-06 13:35 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-06 09:19 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-06 09:26 -0700
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-07 09:43 +1200
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-07 13:29 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-08 09:04 +1200
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> - 2011-06-08 12:34 +0100
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-09 07:37 +1200
                Re: threads, signals, and atomicity of basic types Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-07 14:55 -0700

csiph-web