lockless file descriptor lookup
John Baldwin
jhb at freebsd.org
Wed May 20 19:36:50 UTC 2009
On Wednesday 20 May 2009 2:59:52 pm Jeff Roberson wrote:
> On Thu, 14 May 2009, Bruce Evans wrote:
> > Anyway, you probably need atomics that have suitable memory barriers.
> > Memory barriers must affect the compiler and make it perform refreshes
> > for them to work, so you shouldn't need any volatile casts. E.g., all
> > atomic store operations (including cmpset) have release semantics even
> > if they aren't spelled with "_rel" or implemented using inline asm.
> > On amd64 and i386, they happen to be implemented using inline asm with
> > "memory" clobbers. The "memory" clobbers force refreshes of all
> > non-local variables.
>
> So I think I need an _acq memory barrier on the atomic cmpset of the
> refcount to prevent speculative loading of the fd_ofiles array pointer by
> the processor and the volatile in the second dereference as I have it
> now to prevent caching of the pointer by the compiler. What do you think?
>
> The references prior to the atomic increment have no real ordering
> requirements. Only the ones afterwards need to be strict so that we can
> verify the results.
I think having the _acq is correct and that the "memory" clobber it contains
will force the compiler to reload fd_ofiles without needing the volatile cast
(and thus that you can remove the volatile cast altogether and just add the
_acq barrier).
--
John Baldwin
More information about the freebsd-arch
mailing list