aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/port/atomics.c
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAge
* Fix and improve pg_atomic_flag fallback implementation.Andres Freund2018-04-06
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The atomics fallback implementation for pg_atomic_flag was broken, returning the inverted value from pg_atomic_test_set_flag(). This was unnoticed because a) atomic flags were unused until recently b) the test code wasn't run when the fallback implementation was in use (because it didn't allow to test for some edge cases). Fix the bug, and improve the fallback so it has the same behaviour as the non-fallback implementation in the problematic edge cases. That breaks ABI compatibility in the back branches when fallbacks are in use, but given they were broken until now... Author: Andres Freund Reported-by: Daniel Gustafsson Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/FB948276-7B32-4B77-83E6-D00167F8EEB4@yesql.se https://postgr.es/m/20180406233854.uni2h3mbnveczl32@alap3.anarazel.de Backpatch: 9.5-, where the atomics abstraction was introduced.
* Update copyright for 2018Bruce Momjian2018-01-02
| | | | Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.3
* Phase 2 of pgindent updates.Tom Lane2017-06-21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Change pg_bsd_indent to follow upstream rules for placement of comments to the right of code, and remove pgindent hack that caused comments following #endif to not obey the general rule. Commit e3860ffa4dd0dad0dd9eea4be9cc1412373a8c89 wasn't actually using the published version of pg_bsd_indent, but a hacked-up version that tried to minimize the amount of movement of comments to the right of code. The situation of interest is where such a comment has to be moved to the right of its default placement at column 33 because there's code there. BSD indent has always moved right in units of tab stops in such cases --- but in the previous incarnation, indent was working in 8-space tab stops, while now it knows we use 4-space tabs. So the net result is that in about half the cases, such comments are placed one tab stop left of before. This is better all around: it leaves more room on the line for comment text, and it means that in such cases the comment uniformly starts at the next 4-space tab stop after the code, rather than sometimes one and sometimes two tabs after. Also, ensure that comments following #endif are indented the same as comments following other preprocessor commands such as #else. That inconsistency turns out to have been self-inflicted damage from a poorly-thought-through post-indent "fixup" in pgindent. This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Improve 64bit atomics support.Andres Freund2017-04-07
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When adding atomics back in b64d92f1a, I added 64bit support as optional; there wasn't yet a direct user in sight. That turned out to be a bit short-sighted, it'd already have been useful a number of times. Add a fallback implementation of 64bit atomics, just like the one we have for 32bit atomics. Additionally optimize reads/writes to 64bit on a number of platforms where aligned writes of that size are atomic. This can now be tested with PG_HAVE_8BYTE_SINGLE_COPY_ATOMICITY. Author: Andres Freund Reviewed-By: Amit Kapila Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20160330230914.GH13305@awork2.anarazel.de
* Remove useless duplicate inclusions of system header files.Tom Lane2017-02-25
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | c.h #includes a number of core libc header files, such as <stdio.h>. There's no point in re-including these after having read postgres.h, postgres_fe.h, or c.h; so remove code that did so. While at it, also fix some places that were ignoring our standard pattern of "include postgres[_fe].h, then system header files, then other Postgres header files". While there's not any great magic in doing it that way rather than system headers last, it's silly to have just a few files deviating from the general pattern. (But I didn't attempt to enforce this globally, only in files I was touching anyway.) I'd be the first to say that this is mostly compulsive neatnik-ism, but over time it might save enough compile cycles to be useful.
* Update copyright via script for 2017Bruce Momjian2017-01-03
|
* Fix fallback implementation of pg_atomic_write_u32().Andres Freund2016-10-07
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | I somehow had assumed that in the spinlock (in turn possibly using semaphores) based fallback atomics implementation 32 bit writes could be done without a lock. As far as the write goes that's correct, since postgres supports only platforms with single-copy atomicity for aligned 32bit writes. But writing without holding the spinlock breaks read-modify-write operations like pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u32(), since they'll potentially "miss" a concurrent write, which can't happen in actual hardware implementations. In 9.6+ when using the fallback atomics implementation this could lead to buffer header locks not being properly marked as released, and potentially some related state corruption. I don't see a related danger in 9.5 (earliest release with the API), because pg_atomic_write_u32() wasn't used in a concurrent manner there. The state variable of local buffers, before this change, were manipulated using pg_atomic_write_u32(), to avoid unnecessary synchronization overhead. As that'd not be the case anymore, introduce and use pg_atomic_unlocked_write_u32(), which does not correctly interact with RMW operations. This bug only caused issues when postgres is compiled on platforms without atomics support (i.e. no common new platform), or when compiled with --disable-atomics, which explains why this wasn't noticed in testing. Reported-By: Tom Lane Discussion: <14947.1475690465@sss.pgh.pa.us> Backpatch: 9.5-, where the atomic operations API was introduced.
* pgindent run for 9.6Robert Haas2016-06-09
|
* Update copyright for 2016Bruce Momjian2016-01-02
| | | | Backpatch certain files through 9.1
* Rely on inline functions even if that causes warnings in older compilers.Andres Freund2015-08-05
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | So far we have worked around the fact that some very old compilers do not support 'inline' functions by only using inline functions conditionally (or not at all). Since such compilers are very rare by now, we have decided to rely on inline functions from 9.6 onwards. To avoid breaking these old compilers inline is defined away when not supported. That'll cause "function x defined but not used" type of warnings, but since nobody develops on such compilers anymore that's ok. This change in policy will allow us to more easily employ inline functions. I chose to remove code previously conditional on PG_USE_INLINE as it seemed confusing to have code dependent on a define that's always defined. Blacklisting of compilers, like in c53f73879f, now has to be done differently. A platform template can define PG_FORCE_DISABLE_INLINE to force inline to be defined empty. Discussion: 20150701161447.GB30708@awork2.anarazel.de
* Fix the fallback memory barrier implementation to be reentrant.Andres Freund2015-06-26
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This was essentially "broken" since 0c8eda62; but until more recently (14e8803f) barriers usage in signal handlers was infrequent. The failure to be reentrant was noticed because the test_shm_mq, which uses memory barriers at a high frequency, occasionally got stuck on some solaris buildfarm animals. Turns out, those machines use sun studio 12.1, which doesn't yet have efficient memory barrier support. A machine with a newer sun studio did not fail. Forcing the barrier fallback to be used on x86 allows to reproduce the problem. The new fallback is to use kill(PostmasterPid, 0) based on the theory that that'll always imply a barrier due to checking the liveliness of PostmasterPid on systems old enough to need fallback support. It's hard to come up with a good and performant fallback. I'm not backpatching this for now - the problem isn't active in the back branches, and we haven't backpatched barrier changes for now. Additionally master looks entirely different than the back branches due to the new atomics abstraction. It seems better to let this rest in master, where the non-reentrancy actively causes a problem, and then consider backpatching. Found-By: Robert Haas Discussion: 55626265.3060800@dunslane.net
* pgindent run for 9.5Bruce Momjian2015-05-23
|
* Collection of typo fixes.Heikki Linnakangas2015-05-20
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Use "a" and "an" correctly, mostly in comments. Two error messages were also fixed (they were just elogs, so no translation work required). Two function comments in pg_proc.h were also fixed. Etsuro Fujita reported one of these, but I found a lot more with grep. Also fix a few other typos spotted while grepping for the a/an typos. For example, "consists out of ..." -> "consists of ...". Plus a "though"/ "through" mixup reported by Euler Taveira. Many of these typos were in old code, which would be nice to backpatch to make future backpatching easier. But much of the code was new, and I didn't feel like crafting separate patches for each branch. So no backpatching.
* Provide a generic fallback for pg_compiler_barrier using an extern function.Andres Freund2015-01-11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | If the compiler/arch combination does not provide compiler barriers, provide a fallback. That fallback simply consists out of a function call into a externally defined function. That should guarantee compiler barrierer semantics except for compilers that do inter translation unit/global optimization - those better provide an actual compiler barrier. Hopefully this fixes Tom's report of linker failures due to pg_compiler_barrier_impl not being provided. I'm not backpatching this commit as it builds on the new atomics infrastructure. If we decide an equivalent fix needs to be backpatched, I'll do so in a separate commit. Discussion: 27746.1420930690@sss.pgh.pa.us Per report from Tom Lane.
* Update copyright for 2015Bruce Momjian2015-01-06
| | | | Backpatch certain files through 9.0
* Add a basic atomic ops API abstracting away platform/architecture details.Andres Freund2014-09-25
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