summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/src/backend/port/atomics.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to '')
-rw-r--r--src/backend/port/atomics.c239
1 files changed, 239 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/src/backend/port/atomics.c b/src/backend/port/atomics.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ba274be
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/backend/port/atomics.c
@@ -0,0 +1,239 @@
+/*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ *
+ * atomics.c
+ * Non-Inline parts of the atomics implementation
+ *
+ * Portions Copyright (c) 2013-2022, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
+ *
+ *
+ * IDENTIFICATION
+ * src/backend/port/atomics.c
+ *
+ *-------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ */
+#include "postgres.h"
+
+#include "miscadmin.h"
+#include "port/atomics.h"
+#include "storage/spin.h"
+
+#ifdef PG_HAVE_MEMORY_BARRIER_EMULATION
+#ifdef WIN32
+#error "barriers are required (and provided) on WIN32 platforms"
+#endif
+#include <signal.h>
+#endif
+
+#ifdef PG_HAVE_MEMORY_BARRIER_EMULATION
+void
+pg_spinlock_barrier(void)
+{
+ /*
+ * NB: we have to be reentrant here, some barriers are placed in signal
+ * handlers.
+ *
+ * We use kill(0) for the fallback barrier as we assume that kernels on
+ * systems old enough to require fallback barrier support will include an
+ * appropriate barrier while checking the existence of the postmaster pid.
+ */
+ (void) kill(PostmasterPid, 0);
+}
+#endif
+
+#ifdef PG_HAVE_COMPILER_BARRIER_EMULATION
+void
+pg_extern_compiler_barrier(void)
+{
+ /* do nothing */
+}
+#endif
+
+
+#ifdef PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_FLAG_SIMULATION
+
+void
+pg_atomic_init_flag_impl(volatile pg_atomic_flag *ptr)
+{
+ StaticAssertStmt(sizeof(ptr->sema) >= sizeof(slock_t),
+ "size mismatch of atomic_flag vs slock_t");
+
+#ifndef HAVE_SPINLOCKS
+
+ /*
+ * NB: If we're using semaphore based TAS emulation, be careful to use a
+ * separate set of semaphores. Otherwise we'd get in trouble if an atomic
+ * var would be manipulated while spinlock is held.
+ */
+ s_init_lock_sema((slock_t *) &ptr->sema, true);
+#else
+ SpinLockInit((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+#endif
+
+ ptr->value = false;
+}
+
+bool
+pg_atomic_test_set_flag_impl(volatile pg_atomic_flag *ptr)
+{
+ uint32 oldval;
+
+ SpinLockAcquire((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+ oldval = ptr->value;
+ ptr->value = true;
+ SpinLockRelease((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+
+ return oldval == 0;
+}
+
+void
+pg_atomic_clear_flag_impl(volatile pg_atomic_flag *ptr)
+{
+ SpinLockAcquire((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+ ptr->value = false;
+ SpinLockRelease((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+}
+
+bool
+pg_atomic_unlocked_test_flag_impl(volatile pg_atomic_flag *ptr)
+{
+ return ptr->value == 0;
+}
+
+#endif /* PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_FLAG_SIMULATION */
+
+#ifdef PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_U32_SIMULATION
+void
+pg_atomic_init_u32_impl(volatile pg_atomic_uint32 *ptr, uint32 val_)
+{
+ StaticAssertStmt(sizeof(ptr->sema) >= sizeof(slock_t),
+ "size mismatch of atomic_uint32 vs slock_t");
+
+ /*
+ * If we're using semaphore based atomic flags, be careful about nested
+ * usage of atomics while a spinlock is held.
+ */
+#ifndef HAVE_SPINLOCKS
+ s_init_lock_sema((slock_t *) &ptr->sema, true);
+#else
+ SpinLockInit((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+#endif
+ ptr->value = val_;
+}
+
+void
+pg_atomic_write_u32_impl(volatile pg_atomic_uint32 *ptr, uint32 val)
+{
+ /*
+ * One might think that an unlocked write doesn't need to acquire the
+ * spinlock, but one would be wrong. Even an unlocked write has to cause a
+ * concurrent pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u32() (et al) to fail.
+ */
+ SpinLockAcquire((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+ ptr->value = val;
+ SpinLockRelease((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+}
+
+bool
+pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u32_impl(volatile pg_atomic_uint32 *ptr,
+ uint32 *expected, uint32 newval)
+{
+ bool ret;
+
+ /*
+ * Do atomic op under a spinlock. It might look like we could just skip
+ * the cmpxchg if the lock isn't available, but that'd just emulate a
+ * 'weak' compare and swap. I.e. one that allows spurious failures. Since
+ * several algorithms rely on a strong variant and that is efficiently
+ * implementable on most major architectures let's emulate it here as
+ * well.
+ */
+ SpinLockAcquire((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+
+ /* perform compare/exchange logic */
+ ret = ptr->value == *expected;
+ *expected = ptr->value;
+ if (ret)
+ ptr->value = newval;
+
+ /* and release lock */
+ SpinLockRelease((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+uint32
+pg_atomic_fetch_add_u32_impl(volatile pg_atomic_uint32 *ptr, int32 add_)
+{
+ uint32 oldval;
+
+ SpinLockAcquire((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+ oldval = ptr->value;
+ ptr->value += add_;
+ SpinLockRelease((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+ return oldval;
+}
+
+#endif /* PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_U32_SIMULATION */
+
+
+#ifdef PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_U64_SIMULATION
+
+void
+pg_atomic_init_u64_impl(volatile pg_atomic_uint64 *ptr, uint64 val_)
+{
+ StaticAssertStmt(sizeof(ptr->sema) >= sizeof(slock_t),
+ "size mismatch of atomic_uint64 vs slock_t");
+
+ /*
+ * If we're using semaphore based atomic flags, be careful about nested
+ * usage of atomics while a spinlock is held.
+ */
+#ifndef HAVE_SPINLOCKS
+ s_init_lock_sema((slock_t *) &ptr->sema, true);
+#else
+ SpinLockInit((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+#endif
+ ptr->value = val_;
+}
+
+bool
+pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u64_impl(volatile pg_atomic_uint64 *ptr,
+ uint64 *expected, uint64 newval)
+{
+ bool ret;
+
+ /*
+ * Do atomic op under a spinlock. It might look like we could just skip
+ * the cmpxchg if the lock isn't available, but that'd just emulate a
+ * 'weak' compare and swap. I.e. one that allows spurious failures. Since
+ * several algorithms rely on a strong variant and that is efficiently
+ * implementable on most major architectures let's emulate it here as
+ * well.
+ */
+ SpinLockAcquire((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+
+ /* perform compare/exchange logic */
+ ret = ptr->value == *expected;
+ *expected = ptr->value;
+ if (ret)
+ ptr->value = newval;
+
+ /* and release lock */
+ SpinLockRelease((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+uint64
+pg_atomic_fetch_add_u64_impl(volatile pg_atomic_uint64 *ptr, int64 add_)
+{
+ uint64 oldval;
+
+ SpinLockAcquire((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+ oldval = ptr->value;
+ ptr->value += add_;
+ SpinLockRelease((slock_t *) &ptr->sema);
+ return oldval;
+}
+
+#endif /* PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_U64_SIMULATION */