Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|
previously, commit e7b9887e8b65253087ab0b209dc8dd85c9f09614 aligned
the sizes with the glibc ABI. subsequent discussion during the merge
of the aarch64 port reached a conclusion that we should reject larger
arch-specific sizes, which have significant cost and no benefit, and
stick with the existing common 32-bit sizes for all 32-bit/ILP32 archs
and the x86_64 sizes for 64-bit archs.
one peculiarity of this change is that x32 pthread_attr_t is now
larger in musl than in the glibc x32 ABI, making it unsafe to call
pthread_attr_init from x32 code that was compiled against glibc. with
all the ABI issues of x32, it's not clear that ABI compatibility will
ever work, but if it's needed, pthread_attr_init and related functions
could be modified not to write to the last slot of the object.
this is not a regression versus previous releases, since on previous
releases the x32 pthread type sizes were all severely oversized
already (due to incorrectly using the x86_64 LP64 definitions).
moreover, x32 is still considered experimental and not ABI-stable.
|
|
the previous definitions were copied from x86_64. not only did they
fail to match the ABI sizes; they also wrongly encoded an assumption
that long/pointer types are twice as large as int.
|
|
the memory model we use internally for atomics permits plain loads of
values which may be subject to concurrent modification without
requiring that a special load function be used. since a compiler is
free to make transformations that alter the number of loads or the way
in which loads are performed, the compiler is theoretically free to
break this usage. the most obvious concern is with atomic cas
constructs: something of the form tmp=*p;a_cas(p,tmp,f(tmp)); could be
transformed to a_cas(p,*p,f(*p)); where the latter is intended to show
multiple loads of *p whose resulting values might fail to be equal;
this would break the atomicity of the whole operation. but even more
fundamental breakage is possible.
with the changes being made now, objects that may be modified by
atomics are modeled as volatile, and the atomic operations performed
on them by other threads are modeled as asynchronous stores by
hardware which happens to be acting on the request of another thread.
such modeling of course does not itself address memory synchronization
between cores/cpus, but that aspect was already handled. this all
seems less than ideal, but it's the best we can do without mandating a
C11 compiler and using the C11 model for atomics.
in the case of pthread_once_t, the ABI type of the underlying object
is not volatile-qualified. so we are assuming that accessing the
object through a volatile-qualified lvalue via casts yields volatile
access semantics. the language of the C standard is somewhat unclear
on this matter, but this is an assumption the linux kernel also makes,
and seems to be the correct interpretation of the standard.
|
|
|
|
based on patch by Jens Gustedt.
mtx_t and cnd_t are defined in such a way that they are formally
"compatible types" with pthread_mutex_t and pthread_cond_t,
respectively, when accessed from a different translation unit. this
makes it possible to implement the C11 functions using the pthread
functions (which will dereference them with the pthread types) without
having to use the same types, which would necessitate either namespace
violations (exposing pthread type names in threads.h) or incompatible
changes to the C++ name mangling ABI for the pthread types.
for the rest of the types, things are much simpler; using identical
types is possible without any namespace considerations.
|
|
unfortunately this needs to be able to vary by arch, because of a huge
mess GCC made: the GCC definition, which became the ABI, depends on
quirks in GCC's definition of __alignof__, which does not match the
formal alignment of the type.
GCC's __alignof__ unexpectedly exposes the an implementation detail,
its "preferred alignment" for the type, rather than the formal/ABI
alignment of the type, which it only actually uses in structures. on
most archs the two values are the same, but on some (at least i386)
the preferred alignment is greater than the ABI alignment.
I considered using _Alignas(8) unconditionally, but on at least one
arch (or1k), the alignment of max_align_t with GCC's definition is
only 4 (even the "preferred alignment" for these types is only 4).
|
|
when manipulating the robust list, the order of stores matters,
because the code may be asynchronously interrupted by a fatal signal
and the kernel will then access the robust list in what is essentially
an async-signal context.
previously, aliasing considerations made it seem unlikely that a
compiler could reorder the stores, but proving that they could not be
reordered incorrectly would have been extremely difficult. instead
I've opted to make all the pointers used as part of the robust list,
including those in the robust list head and in the individual mutexes,
volatile.
in addition, the format of the robust list has been changed to point
back to the head at the end, rather than ending with a null pointer.
this is to match the documented kernel robust list ABI. the null
pointer, which was previously used, only worked because faults during
access terminate the robust list processing.
|
|
|
|
|