From: bugzilla@dpdk.org
To: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: [DPDK/core Bug 1385] rt_bitops.h fails to give implied atomicity guarantees
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 09:56:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-1385-3@http.bugs.dpdk.org/> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1506 bytes --]
https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1385
Bug ID: 1385
Summary: rt_bitops.h fails to give implied atomicity guarantees
Product: DPDK
Version: 23.11
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: Normal
Component: core
Assignee: dev@dpdk.org
Reporter: mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com
Target Milestone: ---
The documentation (and the naming) for the rte_bit_relaxed_*() functions in
rte_bitops.h makes clear that all such functions have a relaxed memory order.
The use of the term "relaxed", which most C programmers likely are familiar
with from the C11 memory model specification, itself implies that the
operations are supposed to be atomic. Why otherwise mention the memory
operations are relaxed? Relaxed is the default for non-atomic loads and stores.
In addition, why otherwise declare the address as volatile?
An even stronger indication are the test-and-set family of "relaxed"
rte_bitops.h functions. "Test-and-set" in the low-level C programming context
always implies an atomic operation. A non-atomic test-and-set does not make
sense.
In summary, a perfectly valid interpretation of the API contract is that the
functions are atomic.
However, their implementation is not, which may not be obvious to the causal
API user.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3418 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2024-02-26 9:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-26 9:56 bugzilla [this message]
2024-10-09 20:32 ` bugzilla
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-1385-3@http.bugs.dpdk.org/ \
--to=bugzilla@dpdk.org \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).