| \input texinfo @c -*-texinfo-*- | |
| @c %**start of header | |
| @setfilename libitm.info | |
| @settitle GNU libitm | |
| @c %**end of header | |
| @copying | |
| Copyright @copyright{} 2011-2026 Free Software Foundation, Inc. | |
| Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document | |
| under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or | |
| any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no | |
| Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. | |
| A copy of the license is included in the section entitled ``GNU | |
| Free Documentation License''. | |
| @end copying | |
| @ifinfo | |
| @dircategory GNU Libraries | |
| @direntry | |
| * libitm: (libitm). GNU Transactional Memory Library | |
| @end direntry | |
| This manual documents the GNU Transactional Memory Library. | |
| @insertcopying | |
| @end ifinfo | |
| @setchapternewpage odd | |
| @titlepage | |
| @title The GNU Transactional Memory Library | |
| @page | |
| @vskip 0pt plus 1filll | |
| @comment For the @value{version-GCC} Version* | |
| @sp 1 | |
| @insertcopying | |
| @end titlepage | |
| @summarycontents | |
| @contents | |
| @page | |
| @node Top | |
| @top Introduction | |
| @cindex Introduction | |
| This manual documents the usage and internals of libitm, the GNU Transactional | |
| Memory Library. It provides transaction support for accesses to a process' | |
| memory, enabling easy-to-use synchronization of accesses to shared memory by | |
| several threads. | |
| @comment | |
| @comment When you add a new menu item, please keep the right hand | |
| @comment aligned to the same column. Do not use tabs. This provides | |
| @comment better formatting. | |
| @comment | |
| @menu | |
| * Enabling libitm:: How to enable libitm for your applications. | |
| * C/C++ Language Constructs for TM:: | |
| Notes on the language-level interface supported | |
| by gcc. | |
| * The libitm ABI:: Notes on the external ABI provided by libitm. | |
| * Internals:: Notes on libitm's internal synchronization. | |
| * GNU Free Documentation License:: | |
| How you can copy and share this manual. | |
| * Library Index:: Index of this documentation. | |
| @end menu | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @c Enabling libitm | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @node Enabling libitm | |
| @chapter Enabling libitm | |
| To activate support for TM in C/C++, the compile-time flag @option{-fgnu-tm} | |
| must be specified. This enables TM language-level constructs such as | |
| transaction statements (e.g., @code{__transaction_atomic}, @pxref{C/C++ | |
| Language Constructs for TM} for details). | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @c C/C++ Language Constructs for TM | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @node C/C++ Language Constructs for TM | |
| @chapter C/C++ Language Constructs for TM | |
| Transactions are supported in C++ and C in the form of transaction statements, | |
| transaction expressions, and function transactions. In the following example, | |
| both @code{a} and @code{b} will be read and the difference will be written to | |
| @code{c}, all atomically and isolated from other transactions: | |
| @example | |
| __transaction_atomic @{ c = a - b; @} | |
| @end example | |
| Therefore, another thread can use the following code to concurrently update | |
| @code{b} without ever causing @code{c} to hold a negative value (and without | |
| having to use other synchronization constructs such as locks or C++11 | |
| atomics): | |
| @example | |
| __transaction_atomic @{ if (a > b) b++; @} | |
| @end example | |
| GCC follows the @uref{https://sites.google.com/site/tmforcplusplus/, Draft | |
| Specification of Transactional Language Constructs for C++ (v1.1)} in its | |
| implementation of transactions. | |
| The precise semantics of transactions are defined in terms of the C++11/C11 | |
| memory model (see the specification). Roughly, transactions provide | |
| synchronization guarantees that are similar to what would be guaranteed when | |
| using a single global lock as a guard for all transactions. Note that like | |
| other synchronization constructs in C/C++, transactions rely on a | |
| data-race-free program (e.g., a nontransactional write that is concurrent | |
| with a transactional read to the same memory location is a data race). | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @c The libitm ABI | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @node The libitm ABI | |
| @chapter The libitm ABI | |
| The ABI provided by libitm is basically equal to the Linux variant of Intel's | |
| current TM ABI specification document (Revision 1.1, May 6 2009) but with the | |
| differences listed in this chapter. It would be good if these changes would | |
| eventually be merged into a future version of this specification. To ease | |
| look-up, the following subsections mirror the structure of this specification. | |
| @section [No changes] Objectives | |
| @section [No changes] Non-objectives | |
| @section Library design principles | |
| @subsection [No changes] Calling conventions | |
| @subsection [No changes] TM library algorithms | |
| @subsection [No changes] Optimized load and store routines | |
| @subsection [No changes] Aligned load and store routines | |
| @subsection Data logging functions | |
| The memory locations accessed with transactional loads and stores and the | |
| memory locations whose values are logged must not overlap. This required | |
| separation only extends to the scope of the execution of one transaction | |
| including all the executions of all nested transactions. | |
| The compiler must be consistent (within the scope of a single transaction) | |
| about which memory locations are shared and which are not shared with other | |
| threads (i.e., data must be accessed either transactionally or | |
| nontransactionally). Otherwise, non-write-through TM algorithms would not work. | |
| For memory locations on the stack, this requirement extends to only the | |
| lifetime of the stack frame that the memory location belongs to (or the | |
| lifetime of the transaction, whichever is shorter). Thus, memory that is | |
| reused for several stack frames could be target of both data logging and | |
| transactional accesses; however, this is harmless because these stack frames' | |
| lifetimes will end before the transaction finishes. | |
| @subsection [No changes] Scatter/gather calls | |
| @subsection [No changes] Serial and irrevocable mode | |
| @subsection [No changes] Transaction descriptor | |
| @subsection Store allocation | |
| There is no @code{getTransaction} function. | |
| @subsection [No changes] Naming conventions | |
| @subsection Function pointer encryption | |
| Currently, this is not implemented. | |
| @section Types and macros list | |
| @code{_ITM_codeProperties} has changed, @pxref{txn-code-properties,,Starting a | |
| transaction}. | |
| @code{_ITM_srcLocation} is not used. | |
| @section Function list | |
| @subsection Initialization and finalization functions | |
| These functions are not part of the ABI. | |
| @subsection [No changes] Version checking | |
| @subsection [No changes] Error reporting | |
| @subsection [No changes] inTransaction call | |
| @subsection State manipulation functions | |
| There is no @code{getTransaction} function. Transaction identifiers for | |
| nested transactions will be ordered but not necessarily sequential (i.e., for | |
| a nested transaction's identifier @var{IN} and its enclosing transaction's | |
| identifier @var{IE}, it is guaranteed that @math{IN >= IE}). | |
| @subsection [No changes] Source locations | |
| @subsection Starting a transaction | |
| @subsubsection Transaction code properties | |
| @anchor{txn-code-properties} | |
| The bit @code{hasNoXMMUpdate} is instead called @code{hasNoVectorUpdate}. | |
| Iff it is set, vector register save/restore is not necessary for any target | |
| machine. | |
| The @code{hasNoFloatUpdate} bit (@code{0x0010}) is new. Iff it is set, floating | |
| point register save/restore is not necessary for any target machine. | |
| @code{undoLogCode} is not supported and a fatal runtime error will be raised | |
| if this bit is set. It is not properly defined in the ABI why barriers | |
| other than undo logging are not present; Are they not necessary (e.g., a | |
| transaction operating purely on thread-local data) or have they been omitted by | |
| the compiler because it thinks that some kind of global synchronization | |
| (e.g., serial mode) might perform better? The specification suggests that the | |
| latter might be the case, but the former seems to be more useful. | |
| The @code{readOnly} bit (@code{0x4000}) is new. @strong{TODO} Lexical or dynamic | |
| scope? | |
| @code{hasNoRetry} is not supported. If this bit is not set, but | |
| @code{hasNoAbort} is set, the library can assume that transaction | |
| rollback will not be requested. | |
| It would be useful if the absence of externally-triggered rollbacks would be | |
| reported for the dynamic scope as well, not just for the lexical scope | |
| (@code{hasNoAbort}). Without this, a library cannot exploit this together | |
| with flat nesting. | |
| @code{exceptionBlock} is not supported because exception blocks are not used. | |
| @subsubsection [No changes] Windows exception state | |
| @subsubsection [No changes] Other machine state | |
| @subsubsection [No changes] Results from beginTransaction | |
| @subsection Aborting a transaction | |
| @code{_ITM_rollbackTransaction} is not supported. @code{_ITM_abortTransaction} | |
| is supported but the abort reasons @code{exceptionBlockAbort}, | |
| @code{TMConflict}, and @code{userRetry} are not supported. There are no | |
| exception blocks in general, so the related cases also do not have to be | |
| considered. To encode @code{__transaction_cancel [[outer]]}, compilers must | |
| set the new @code{outerAbort} bit (@code{0x10}) additionally to the | |
| @code{userAbort} bit in the abort reason. | |
| @subsection Committing a transaction | |
| The exception handling (EH) scheme is different. The Intel ABI requires the | |
| @code{_ITM_tryCommitTransaction} function that will return even when the | |
| commit failed and will have to be matched with calls to either | |
| @code{_ITM_abortTransaction} or @code{_ITM_commitTransaction}. In contrast, | |
| gcc relies on transactional wrappers for the functions of the Exception | |
| Handling ABI and on one additional commit function (shown below). This allows | |
| the TM to keep track of EH internally and thus it does not have to embed the | |
| cleanup of EH state into the existing EH code in the program. | |
| @code{_ITM_tryCommitTransaction} is not supported. | |
| @code{_ITM_commitTransactionToId} is also not supported because the | |
| propagation of thrown exceptions will not bypass commits of nested | |
| transactions. | |
| @example | |
| void _ITM_commitTransactionEH(void *exc_ptr) ITM_REGPARM; | |
| void *_ITM_cxa_allocate_exception (size_t); | |
| void _ITM_cxa_free_exception (void *exc_ptr); | |
| void _ITM_cxa_throw (void *obj, void *tinfo, void (*dest) (void *)); | |
| void *_ITM_cxa_begin_catch (void *exc_ptr); | |
| void _ITM_cxa_end_catch (void); | |
| @end example | |
| The EH scheme changed in version 6 of GCC. Previously, the compiler | |
| added a call to @code{_ITM_commitTransactionEH} to commit a transaction if | |
| an exception could be in flight at this position in the code; @code{exc_ptr} is | |
| the address of the current exception and must be non-zero. Now, the | |
| compiler must catch all exceptions that are about to be thrown out of a | |
| transaction and call @code{_ITM_commitTransactionEH} from the catch clause, | |
| with @code{exc_ptr} being zero. | |
| Note that the old EH scheme never worked completely in GCC's implementation; | |
| libitm currently does not try to be compatible with the old scheme. | |
| The @code{_ITM_cxa...} functions are transactional wrappers for the respective | |
| @code{__cxa...} functions and must be called instead of these in transactional | |
| code. @code{_ITM_cxa_free_exception} is new in GCC 6. | |
| To support this EH scheme, libstdc++ needs to provide one additional function | |
| (@code{_cxa_tm_cleanup}), which is used by the TM to clean up the exception | |
| handling state while rolling back a transaction: | |
| @example | |
| void __cxa_tm_cleanup (void *unthrown_obj, void *cleanup_exc, | |
| unsigned int caught_count); | |
| @end example | |
| Since GCC 6, @code{unthrown_obj} is not used anymore and always null; | |
| prior to that, @code{unthrown_obj} is non-null if the program called | |
| @code{__cxa_allocate_exception} for this exception but did not yet called | |
| @code{__cxa_throw} for it. @code{cleanup_exc} is non-null if the program is | |
| currently processing a cleanup along an exception path but has not caught this | |
| exception yet. @code{caught_count} is the nesting depth of | |
| @code{__cxa_begin_catch} within the transaction (which can be counted by the TM | |
| using @code{_ITM_cxa_begin_catch} and @code{_ITM_cxa_end_catch}); | |
| @code{__cxa_tm_cleanup} then performs rollback by essentially performing | |
| @code{__cxa_end_catch} that many times. | |
| @subsection Exception handling support | |
| Currently, there is no support for functionality like | |
| @code{__transaction_cancel throw} as described in the C++ TM specification. | |
| Supporting this should be possible with the EH scheme explained previously | |
| because via the transactional wrappers for the EH ABI, the TM is able to | |
| observe and intercept EH. | |
| @subsection [No changes] Transition to serial--irrevocable mode | |
| @subsection [No changes] Data transfer functions | |
| @subsection [No changes] Transactional memory copies | |
| @subsection Transactional versions of memmove | |
| If either the source or destination memory region is to be accessed | |
| nontransactionally, then source and destination regions must not be | |
| overlapping. The respective @code{_ITM_memmove} functions are still | |
| available but a fatal runtime error will be raised if such regions do overlap. | |
| To support this functionality, the ABI would have to specify how the | |
| intersection of the regions has to be accessed (i.e., transactionally or | |
| nontransactionally). | |
| @subsection [No changes] Transactional versions of memset | |
| @subsection [No changes] Logging functions | |
| @subsection User-registered commit and undo actions | |
| Commit actions will get executed in the same order in which the respective | |
| calls to @code{_ITM_addUserCommitAction} happened. Only | |
| @code{_ITM_noTransactionId} is allowed as value for the | |
| @code{resumingTransactionId} argument. Commit actions get executed after | |
| privatization safety has been ensured. | |
| Undo actions will get executed in reverse order compared to the order in which | |
| the respective calls to @code{_ITM_addUserUndoAction} happened. The ordering of | |
| undo actions w.r.t. the roll-back of other actions (e.g., data transfers or | |
| memory allocations) is undefined. | |
| @code{_ITM_getThreadnum} is not supported currently because its only purpose | |
| is to provide a thread ID that matches some assumed performance tuning output, | |
| but this output is not part of the ABI nor further defined by it. | |
| @code{_ITM_dropReferences} is not supported currently because its semantics and | |
| the intention behind it is not entirely clear. The | |
| specification suggests that this function is necessary because of certain | |
| orderings of data transfer undos and the releasing of memory regions (i.e., | |
| privatization). However, this ordering is never defined, nor is the ordering of | |
| dropping references w.r.t. other events. | |
| @subsection [New] Transactional indirect calls | |
| Indirect calls (i.e., calls through a function pointer) within transactions | |
| should execute the transactional clone of the original function (i.e., a clone | |
| of the original that has been fully instrumented to use the TM runtime), if | |
| such a clone is available. The runtime provides two functions to | |
| register/deregister clone tables: | |
| @example | |
| struct clone_entry | |
| @{ | |
| void *orig, *clone; | |
| @}; | |
| void _ITM_registerTMCloneTable (clone_entry *table, size_t entries); | |
| void _ITM_deregisterTMCloneTable (clone_entry *table); | |
| @end example | |
| Registered tables must be writable by the TM runtime, and must be live | |
| throughout the life-time of the TM runtime. | |
| @strong{TODO} The intention was always to drop the registration functions | |
| entirely, and create a new ELF Phdr describing the linker-sorted table. Much | |
| like what currently happens for @code{PT_GNU_EH_FRAME}. | |
| This work kept getting bogged down in how to represent the @var{N} different | |
| code generation variants. We clearly needed at least two---SW and HW | |
| transactional clones---but there was always a suggestion of more variants for | |
| different TM assumptions/invariants. | |
| The compiler can then use two TM runtime functions to perform indirect calls in | |
| transactions: | |
| @example | |
| void *_ITM_getTMCloneOrIrrevocable (void *function) ITM_REGPARM; | |
| void *_ITM_getTMCloneSafe (void *function) ITM_REGPARM; | |
| @end example | |
| If there is a registered clone for supplied function, both will return a | |
| pointer to the clone. If not, the first runtime function will attempt to switch | |
| to serial--irrevocable mode and return the original pointer, whereas the second | |
| will raise a fatal runtime error. | |
| @subsection [New] Transactional dynamic memory management | |
| @example | |
| void *_ITM_malloc (size_t) | |
| __attribute__((__malloc__)) ITM_PURE; | |
| void *_ITM_calloc (size_t, size_t) | |
| __attribute__((__malloc__)) ITM_PURE; | |
| void _ITM_free (void *) ITM_PURE; | |
| @end example | |
| These functions are essentially transactional wrappers for @code{malloc}, | |
| @code{calloc}, and @code{free}. Within transactions, the compiler should | |
| replace calls to the original functions with calls to the wrapper functions. | |
| libitm also provides transactional clones of C++ memory management functions | |
| such as global operator new and delete. They are part of libitm for historic | |
| reasons but do not need to be part of this ABI. | |
| @section [No changes] Future Enhancements to the ABI | |
| @section Sample code | |
| The code examples might not be correct w.r.t. the current version of the ABI, | |
| especially everything related to exception handling. | |
| @section [New] Memory model | |
| The ABI should define a memory model and the ordering that is guaranteed for | |
| data transfers and commit/undo actions, or at least refer to another memory | |
| model that needs to be preserved. Without that, the compiler cannot ensure the | |
| memory model specified on the level of the programming language (e.g., by the | |
| C++ TM specification). | |
| For example, if a transactional load is ordered before another load/store, then | |
| the TM runtime must also ensure this ordering when accessing shared state. If | |
| not, this might break the kind of publication safety used in the C++ TM | |
| specification. Likewise, the TM runtime must ensure privatization safety. | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @c Internals | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @node Internals | |
| @chapter Internals | |
| @section TM methods and method groups | |
| libitm supports several ways of synchronizing transactions with each other. | |
| These TM methods (or TM algorithms) are implemented in the form of | |
| subclasses of @code{abi_dispatch}, which provide methods for | |
| transactional loads and stores as well as callbacks for rollback and commit. | |
| All methods that are compatible with each other (i.e., that let concurrently | |
| running transactions still synchronize correctly even if different methods | |
| are used) belong to the same TM method group. Pointers to TM methods can be | |
| obtained using the factory methods prefixed with @code{dispatch_} in | |
| @file{libitm_i.h}. There are two special methods, @code{dispatch_serial} and | |
| @code{dispatch_serialirr}, that are compatible with all methods because they | |
| run transactions completely in serial mode. | |
| @subsection TM method life cycle | |
| The state of TM methods does not change after construction, but they do alter | |
| the state of transactions that use this method. However, because | |
| per-transaction data gets used by several methods, @code{gtm_thread} is | |
| responsible for setting an initial state that is useful for all methods. | |
| After that, methods are responsible for resetting/clearing this state on each | |
| rollback or commit (of outermost transactions), so that the transaction | |
| executed next is not affected by the previous transaction. | |
| There is also global state associated with each method group, which is | |
| initialized and shut down (@code{method_group::init()} and @code{fini()}) | |
| when switching between method groups (see @file{retry.cc}). | |
| @subsection Selecting the default method | |
| The default method that libitm uses for freshly started transactions (but | |
| not necessarily for restarted transactions) can be set via an environment | |
| variable (@env{ITM_DEFAULT_METHOD}), whose value should be equal to the name | |
| of one of the factory methods returning abi_dispatch subclasses but without | |
| the "dispatch_" prefix (e.g., "serialirr" instead of | |
| @code{GTM::dispatch_serialirr()}). | |
| Note that this environment variable is only a hint for libitm and might not | |
| be supported in the future. | |
| @section Nesting: flat vs. closed | |
| We support two different kinds of nesting of transactions. In the case of | |
| @emph{flat nesting}, the nesting structure is flattened and all nested | |
| transactions are subsumed by the enclosing transaction. In contrast, | |
| with @emph{closed nesting}, nested transactions that have not yet committed | |
| can be rolled back separately from the enclosing transactions; when they | |
| commit, they are subsumed by the enclosing transaction, and their effects | |
| will be finally committed when the outermost transaction commits. | |
| @emph{Open nesting} (where nested transactions can commit independently of the | |
| enclosing transactions) are not supported. | |
| Flat nesting is the default nesting mode, but closed nesting is supported and | |
| used when transactions contain user-controlled aborts | |
| (@code{__transaction_cancel} statements). We assume that user-controlled | |
| aborts are rare in typical code and used mostly in exceptional situations. | |
| Thus, it makes more sense to use flat nesting by default to avoid the | |
| performance overhead of the additional checkpoints required for closed | |
| nesting. User-controlled aborts will correctly abort the innermost enclosing | |
| transaction, whereas the whole (i.e., outermost) transaction will be restarted | |
| otherwise (e.g., when a transaction encounters data conflicts during | |
| optimistic execution). | |
| @section Locking conventions | |
| This section documents the locking scheme and rules for all uses of locking | |
| in libitm. We have to support serial(-irrevocable) mode, which is implemented | |
| using a global lock as explained next (called the @emph{serial lock}). To | |
| simplify the overall design, we use the same lock as catch-all locking | |
| mechanism for other infrequent tasks such as (de)registering clone tables or | |
| threads. Besides the serial lock, there are @emph{per-method-group locks} that | |
| are managed by specific method groups (i.e., groups of similar TM concurrency | |
| control algorithms), and lock-like constructs for quiescence-based operations | |
| such as ensuring privatization safety. | |
| Thus, the actions that participate in the libitm-internal locking are either | |
| @emph{active transactions} that do not run in serial mode, @emph{serial | |
| transactions} (which (are about to) run in serial mode), and management tasks | |
| that do not execute within a transaction but have acquired the serial mode | |
| like a serial transaction would do (e.g., to be able to register threads with | |
| libitm). Transactions become active as soon as they have successfully used the | |
| serial lock to announce this globally (@pxref{serial-lock-impl,,Serial lock | |
| implementation}). Likewise, transactions become serial transactions as soon as | |
| they have acquired the exclusive rights provided by the serial lock (i.e., | |
| serial mode, which also means that there are no other concurrent active or | |
| serial transactions). Note that active transactions can become serial | |
| transactions when they enter serial mode during the runtime of the | |
| transaction. | |
| @subsection State-to-lock mapping | |
| Application data is protected by the serial lock if there is a serial | |
| transaction and no concurrently running active transaction (i.e., non-serial). | |
| Otherwise, application data is protected by the currently selected method | |
| group, which might use per-method-group locks or other mechanisms. Also note | |
| that application data that is about to be privatized might not be allowed to be | |
| accessed by nontransactional code until privatization safety has been ensured; | |
| the details of this are handled by the current method group. | |
| libitm-internal state is either protected by the serial lock or accessed | |
| through custom concurrent code. The latter applies to the public/shared part | |
| of a transaction object and most typical method-group-specific state. | |
| The former category (protected by the serial lock) includes: | |
| @itemize @bullet | |
| @item The list of active threads that have used transactions. | |
| @item The tables that map functions to their transactional clones. | |
| @item The current selection of which method group to use. | |
| @item Some method-group-specific data, or invariants of this data. For example, | |
| resetting a method group to its initial state is handled by switching to the | |
| same method group, so the serial lock protects such resetting as well. | |
| @end itemize | |
| In general, such state is immutable whenever there exists an active | |
| (non-serial) transaction. If there is no active transaction, a serial | |
| transaction (or a thread that is not currently executing a transaction but has | |
| acquired the serial lock) is allowed to modify this state (but must of course | |
| be careful to not surprise the current method group's implementation with such | |
| modifications). | |
| @subsection Lock acquisition order | |
| To prevent deadlocks, locks acquisition must happen in a globally agreed-upon | |
| order. Note that this applies to other forms of blocking too, but does not | |
| necessarily apply to lock acquisitions that do not block (e.g., trylock() | |
| calls that do not get retried forever). Note that serial transactions are | |
| never return back to active transactions until the transaction has committed. | |
| Likewise, active transactions stay active until they have committed. | |
| Per-method-group locks are typically also not released before commit. | |
| Lock acquisition / blocking rules: | |
| @itemize @bullet | |
| @item Transactions must become active or serial before they are allowed to | |
| use method-group-specific locks or blocking (i.e., the serial lock must be | |
| acquired before those other locks, either in serial or nonserial mode). | |
| @item Any number of threads that do not currently run active transactions can | |
| block while trying to get the serial lock in exclusive mode. Note that active | |
| transactions must not block when trying to upgrade to serial mode unless there | |
| is no other transaction that is trying that (the latter is ensured by the | |
| serial lock implementation. | |
| @item Method groups must prevent deadlocks on their locks. In particular, they | |
| must also be prepared for another active transaction that has acquired | |
| method-group-specific locks but is blocked during an attempt to upgrade to | |
| being a serial transaction. See below for details. | |
| @item Serial transactions can acquire method-group-specific locks because there | |
| will be no other active nor serial transaction. | |
| @end itemize | |
| There is no single rule for per-method-group blocking because this depends on | |
| when a TM method might acquire locks. If no active transaction can upgrade to | |
| being a serial transaction after it has acquired per-method-group locks (e.g., | |
| when those locks are only acquired during an attempt to commit), then the TM | |
| method does not need to consider a potential deadlock due to serial mode. | |
| If there can be upgrades to serial mode after the acquisition of | |
| per-method-group locks, then TM methods need to avoid those deadlocks: | |
| @itemize @bullet | |
| @item When upgrading to a serial transaction, after acquiring exclusive rights | |
| to the serial lock but before waiting for concurrent active transactions to | |
| finish (@pxref{serial-lock-impl,,Serial lock implementation} for details), | |
| we have to wake up all active transactions waiting on the upgrader's | |
| per-method-group locks. | |
| @item Active transactions blocking on per-method-group locks need to check the | |
| serial lock and abort if there is a pending serial transaction. | |
| @item Lost wake-ups have to be prevented (e.g., by changing a bit in each | |
| per-method-group lock before doing the wake-up, and only blocking on this lock | |
| using a futex if this bit is not group). | |
| @end itemize | |
| @strong{TODO}: Can reuse serial lock for gl-*? And if we can, does it make | |
| sense to introduce further complexity in the serial lock? For gl-*, we can | |
| really only avoid an abort if we do -wb and -vbv. | |
| @subsection Serial lock implementation | |
| @anchor{serial-lock-impl} | |
| The serial lock implementation is optimized towards assuming that serial | |
| transactions are infrequent and not the common case. However, the performance | |
| of entering serial mode can matter because when only few transactions are run | |
| concurrently or if there are few threads, then it can be efficient to run | |
| transactions serially. | |
| The serial lock is similar to a multi-reader-single-writer lock in that there | |
| can be several active transactions but only one serial transaction. However, | |
| we do want to avoid contention (in the lock implementation) between active | |
| transactions, so we split up the reader side of the lock into per-transaction | |
| flags that are true iff the transaction is active. The exclusive writer side | |
| remains a shared single flag, which is acquired using a CAS, for example. | |
| On the fast-path, the serial lock then works similar to Dekker's algorithm but | |
| with several reader flags that a serial transaction would have to check. | |
| A serial transaction thus requires a list of all threads with potentially | |
| active transactions; we can use the serial lock itself to protect this list | |
| (i.e., only threads that have acquired the serial lock can modify this list). | |
| We want starvation-freedom for the serial lock to allow for using it to ensure | |
| progress for potentially starved transactions (@pxref{progress-guarantees,, | |
| Progress Guarantees} for details). However, this is currently not enforced by | |
| the implementation of the serial lock. | |
| Here is pseudo-code for the read/write fast paths of acquiring the serial | |
| lock (read-to-write upgrade is similar to write_lock: | |
| @example | |
| // read_lock: | |
| tx->shared_state |= active; | |
| __sync_synchronize(); // or STLD membar, or C++0x seq-cst fence | |
| while (!serial_lock.exclusive) | |
| if (spinning_for_too_long) goto slowpath; | |
| // write_lock: | |
| if (CAS(&serial_lock.exclusive, 0, this) != 0) | |
| goto slowpath; // writer-writer contention | |
| // need a membar here, but CAS already has full membar semantics | |
| bool need_blocking = false; | |
| for (t: all txns) | |
| @{ | |
| for (;t->shared_state & active;) | |
| if (spinning_for_too_long) @{ need_blocking = true; break; @} | |
| @} | |
| if (need_blocking) goto slowpath; | |
| @end example | |
| Releasing a lock in this spin-lock version then just consists of resetting | |
| @code{tx->shared_state} to inactive or clearing @code{serial_lock.exclusive}. | |
| However, we can't rely on a pure spinlock because we need to get the OS | |
| involved at some time (e.g., when there are more threads than CPUs to run on). | |
| Therefore, the real implementation falls back to a blocking slow path, either | |
| based on pthread mutexes or Linux futexes. | |
| @subsection Reentrancy | |
| libitm has to consider the following cases of reentrancy: | |
| @itemize @bullet | |
| @item Transaction calls unsafe code that starts a new transaction: The outer | |
| transaction will become a serial transaction before executing unsafe code. | |
| Therefore, nesting within serial transactions must work, even if the nested | |
| transaction is called from within uninstrumented code. | |
| @item Transaction calls either a transactional wrapper or safe code, which in | |
| turn starts a new transaction: It is not yet defined in the specification | |
| whether this is allowed. Thus, it is undefined whether libitm supports this. | |
| @item Code that starts new transactions might be called from within any part | |
| of libitm: This kind of reentrancy would likely be rather complex and can | |
| probably be avoided. Therefore, it is not supported. | |
| @end itemize | |
| @subsection Privatization safety | |
| Privatization safety is ensured by libitm using a quiescence-based approach. | |
| Basically, a privatizing transaction waits until all concurrent active | |
| transactions will either have finished (are not active anymore) or operate on | |
| a sufficiently recent snapshot to not access the privatized data anymore. This | |
| happens after the privatizing transaction has stopped being an active | |
| transaction, so waiting for quiescence does not contribute to deadlocks. | |
| In method groups that need to ensure publication safety explicitly, active | |
| transactions maintain a flag or timestamp in the public/shared part of the | |
| transaction descriptor. Before blocking, privatizers need to let the other | |
| transactions know that they should wake up the privatizer. | |
| @strong{TODO} Ho to implement the waiters? Should those flags be | |
| per-transaction or at a central place? We want to avoid one wake/wait call | |
| per active transactions, so we might want to use either a tree or combining | |
| to reduce the syscall overhead, or rather spin for a long amount of time | |
| instead of doing blocking. Also, it would be good if only the last transaction | |
| that the privatizer waits for would do the wake-up. | |
| @subsection Progress guarantees | |
| @anchor{progress-guarantees} | |
| Transactions that do not make progress when using the current TM method will | |
| eventually try to execute in serial mode. Thus, the serial lock's progress | |
| guarantees determine the progress guarantees of the whole TM. Obviously, we at | |
| least need deadlock-freedom for the serial lock, but it would also be good to | |
| provide starvation-freedom (informally, all threads will finish executing a | |
| transaction eventually iff they get enough cycles). | |
| However, the scheduling of transactions (e.g., thread scheduling by the OS) | |
| also affects the handling of progress guarantees by the TM. First, the TM | |
| can only guarantee deadlock-freedom if threads do not get stopped. Likewise, | |
| low-priority threads can starve if they do not get scheduled when other | |
| high-priority threads get those cycles instead. | |
| If all threads get scheduled eventually, correct lock implementations will | |
| provide deadlock-freedom, but might not provide starvation-freedom. We can | |
| either enforce the latter in the TM's lock implementation, or assume that | |
| the scheduling is sufficiently random to yield a probabilistic guarantee that | |
| no thread will starve (because eventually, a transaction will encounter a | |
| scheduling that will allow it to run). This can indeed work well in practice | |
| but is not necessarily guaranteed to work (e.g., simple spin locks can be | |
| pretty efficient). | |
| Because enforcing stronger progress guarantees in the TM has a higher runtime | |
| overhead, we focus on deadlock-freedom right now and assume that the threads | |
| will get scheduled eventually by the OS (but don't consider threads with | |
| different priorities). We should support starvation-freedom for serial | |
| transactions in the future. Everything beyond that is highly related to proper | |
| contention management across all of the TM (including with TM method to | |
| choose), and is future work. | |
| @strong{TODO} Handling thread priorities: We want to avoid priority inversion | |
| but it's unclear how often that actually matters in practice. Workloads that | |
| have threads with different priorities will likely also require lower latency | |
| or higher throughput for high-priority threads. Therefore, it probably makes | |
| not that much sense (except for eventual progress guarantees) to use | |
| priority inheritance until the TM has priority-aware contention management. | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @c GNU Free Documentation License | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @include fdl.texi | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @c Index | |
| @c --------------------------------------------------------------------- | |
| @node Library Index | |
| @unnumbered Library Index | |
| @printindex cp | |
| @bye |