Add a basic atomic ops API abstracting away platform/architecture details.

Several upcoming performance/scalability improvements require atomic
operations. This new API avoids the need to splatter compiler and
architecture dependent code over all the locations employing atomic
ops.

For several of the potential usages it'd be problematic to maintain
both, a atomics using implementation and one using spinlocks or
similar. In all likelihood one of the implementations would not get
tested regularly under concurrency. To avoid that scenario the new API
provides a automatic fallback of atomic operations to spinlocks. All
properties of atomic operations are maintained. This fallback -
obviously - isn't as fast as just using atomic ops, but it's not bad
either. For one of the future users the atomics ontop spinlocks
implementation was actually slightly faster than the old purely
spinlock using implementation. That's important because it reduces the
fear of regressing older platforms when improving the scalability for
new ones.

The API, loosely modeled after the C11 atomics support, currently
provides 'atomic flags' and 32 bit unsigned integers. If the platform
efficiently supports atomic 64 bit unsigned integers those are also
provided.

To implement atomics support for a platform/architecture/compiler for
a type of atomics 32bit compare and exchange needs to be
implemented. If available and more efficient native support for flags,
32 bit atomic addition, and corresponding 64 bit operations may also
be provided. Additional useful atomic operations are implemented
generically ontop of these.

The implementation for various versions of gcc, msvc and sun studio have
been tested. Additional existing stub implementations for
* Intel icc
* HUPX acc
* IBM xlc
are included but have never been tested. These will likely require
fixes based on buildfarm and user feedback.

As atomic operations also require barriers for some operations the
existing barrier support has been moved into the atomics code.

Author: Andres Freund with contributions from Oskari Saarenmaa
Reviewed-By: Amit Kapila, Robert Haas, Heikki Linnakangas and Álvaro Herrera
Discussion: CA+TgmoYBW+ux5-8Ja=Mcyuy8=VXAnVRHp3Kess6Pn3DMXAPAEA@mail.gmail.com,
    20131015123303.GH5300@awork2.anarazel.de,
    20131028205522.GI20248@awork2.anarazel.de

1 files changed, 103 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/src/include/port/atomics/generic-xlc.h b/src/include/port/atomics/generic-xlc.h
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..579554d8a67
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/include/port/atomics/generic-xlc.h
@@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
+/*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ *
+ * generic-xlc.h
+ *	  Atomic operations for IBM's CC
+ *
+ * Portions Copyright (c) 2013-2014, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
+ *
+ * NOTES:
+ *
+ * Documentation:
+ * * Synchronization and atomic built-in functions
+ *   http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/lnxpcomp/v8v101/topic/com.ibm.xlcpp8l.doc/compiler/ref/bif_sync.htm
+ *
+ * src/include/port/atomics/generic-xlc.h
+ *
+ * -------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ */
+
+#include <atomic.h>
+
+#define PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_U32_SUPPORT
+typedef struct pg_atomic_uint32
+{
+	volatile uint32 value;
+} pg_atomic_uint32;
+
+
+/* 64bit atomics are only supported in 64bit mode */
+#ifdef __64BIT__
+#define PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_U64_SUPPORT
+typedef struct pg_atomic_uint64
+{
+	volatile uint64 value;
+} pg_atomic_uint64;
+
+#endif /* __64BIT__ */
+
+#if defined(PG_USE_INLINE) || defined(ATOMICS_INCLUDE_DEFINITIONS)
+
+#define PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_COMPARE_EXCHANGE_U32
+static inline bool
+pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u32_impl(volatile pg_atomic_uint32 *ptr,
+									uint32 *expected, uint32 newval)
+{
+	bool	ret;
+	uint64	current;
+
+	/*
+	 * xlc's documentation tells us:
+	 * "If __compare_and_swap is used as a locking primitive, insert a call to
+	 * the __isync built-in function at the start of any critical sections."
+	 */
+	__isync();
+
+	/*
+	 * XXX: __compare_and_swap is defined to take signed parameters, but that
+	 * shouldn't matter since we don't perform any arithmetic operations.
+	 */
+	current = (uint32)__compare_and_swap((volatile int*)ptr->value,
+										 (int)*expected, (int)newval);
+	ret = current == *expected;
+	*expected = current;
+	return ret;
+}
+
+#define PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_FETCH_ADD_U32
+static inline uint32
+pg_atomic_fetch_add_u32_impl(volatile pg_atomic_uint32 *ptr, int32 add_)
+{
+	return __fetch_and_add(&ptr->value, add_);
+}
+#endif
+
+#ifdef PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_U64_SUPPORT
+
+#define PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_COMPARE_EXCHANGE_U64
+static inline bool
+pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u64_impl(volatile pg_atomic_uint64 *ptr,
+									uint64 *expected, uint64 newval)
+{
+	bool	ret;
+	uint64	current;
+
+	__isync();
+
+	current = (uint64)__compare_and_swaplp((volatile long*)ptr->value,
+										   (long)*expected, (long)newval);
+	ret = current == *expected;
+	*expected = current;
+	return ret;
+}
+
+#define PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_FETCH_ADD_U64
+static inline uint64
+pg_atomic_fetch_add_u64_impl(volatile pg_atomic_uint64 *ptr, int64 add_)
+{
+	return __fetch_and_addlp(&ptr->value, add_);
+}
+#endif
+
+#endif /* PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_U64_SUPPORT */
+
+#endif /* defined(PG_USE_INLINE) || defined(ATOMICS_INCLUDE_DEFINITIONS) */