Poster of Linux kernelThe best gift for a Linux geek
 Linux kernel map 
Team LiB
Previous Section Next Section

Atomic Operations

Atomic operations provide instructions that execute atomicallywithout interruption. Just as the atom was originally thought to be an indivisible particle, atomic operators are indivisible instructions. For example, as discussed in the previous chapter, an atomic increment can read and increment a variable by one in a single indivisible and uninterruptible step. Instead of the race discussed in the previous chapter, the outcome is always similar to the following (assume i is initially seven):

Thread 1

Thread 2

atomic increment i (7 -> 8)

-

-

atomic increment i (8 -> 9)


The resulting value, nine, is correct. It is never possible for the two atomic operations to occur on the same variable concurrently. Therefore, it is not possible for the increments to race.

The kernel provides two sets of interfaces for atomic operationsone that operates on integers and another that operates on individual bits. These interfaces are implemented on every architecture that Linux supports. Most architectures either directly support simple atomic operations or provide an operation to lock the memory bus for a single operation (and thus ensure another operation cannot occur simultaneously). Architectures that cannot easily support primitive atomic operations, such as SPARC, somehow cope. (The only atomic instruction that is guaranteed to exist on all SPARC machines is ldstub.)

Atomic Integer Operations

The atomic integer methods operate on a special data type, atomic_t. This special type is used, as opposed to having the functions work directly on the C int type, for a couple of reasons. First, having the atomic functions accept only the atomic_t type ensures that the atomic operations are used only with these special types. Likewise, it also ensures that the data types are not passed to any other nonatomic functions. Indeed, what good would atomic operations be if they were not consistently used on the data? Next, the use of atomic_t ensures the compiler does not (erroneously but cleverly) optimize access to the valueit is important the atomic operations receive the correct memory address and not an alias. Finally, use of atomic_t can hide any architecture-specific differences in its implementation.

Despite being an integer, and thus 32 bits on all of the machines that Linux supports, developers and their code once had to assume that an atomic_t was no larger than 24 bits in size. The SPARC port in Linux has an odd implementation of atomic operations: A lock was embedded in the lower 8 bits of the 32-bit int (it looked like Figure 9.1). The lock was used to protect concurrent access to the atomic type because the SPARC architecture lacks appropriate support at the instruction level. Consequently, only 24 usable bits were available on SPARC machines. Although code that assumed that the full 32-bit range existed would work on other machines, it would have failed in strange and subtle ways on SPARC machinesand that is just rude. Recently, clever hacks have allowed SPARC to provide a fully usable 32-bit atomic_t, and this limitation is no more. The old 24-bit implementation is still used by some internal SPARC code, however, and lives in SPARC's <asm/atomic.h>.

Figure 9.1. Old layout of the 32-bit atomic_t on SPARC.


The declarations needed to use the atomic integer operations are in <asm/atomic.h>. Some architectures provide additional methods that are unique to that architecture, but all architectures provide at least a minimum set of operations that are used throughout the kernel. When you write kernel code, you can ensure that these operations are correctly implemented on all architectures.

Defining an atomic_t is done in the usual manner. Optionally, you can set it to an initial value:

atomic_t v;                   /* define v */
atomic_t u = ATOMIC_INIT(0);     /* define u and initialize it to zero */

Operations are all simple:

atomic_set(&v, 4);     /* v = 4 (atomically) */
atomic_add(2, &v);     /* v = v + 2 = 6 (atomically) */
atomic_inc(&v);        /* v = v + 1 = 7 (atomically) */

If you ever need to convert an atomic_t to an int, use atomic_read():

printk("%d\n", atomic_read(&v)); /* will print "7" */

A common use of the atomic integer operations is to implement counters. Protecting a sole counter with a complex locking scheme is silly, so instead developers use atomic_inc() and atomic_dec(), which are much lighter in weight.

Another use of the atomic integer operators is atomically performing an operation and testing the result. A common example is the atomic decrement and test:

int atomic_dec_and_test(atomic_t *v)

This function decrements by one the given atomic value. If the result is zero, it returns true; otherwise, it returns false. A full listing of the standard atomic integer operations (those found on all architectures) is in Table 9.1. All the operations implemented on a specific architecture can be found in <asm/atomic.h>.

Table 9.1. Full Listing of Atomic Integer Operations

Atomic Integer Operation

Description

ATOMIC_INIT(int i)

At declaration, initialize an atomic_t to i

int atomic_read(atomic_t *v)

Atomically read the integer value of v

void atomic_set(atomic_t *v, int i)

Atomically set v equal to i

void atomic_add(int i, atomic_t *v)

Atomically add i to v

void atomic_sub(int i, atomic_t *v)

Atomically subtract i from v

void atomic_inc(atomic_t *v)

Atomically add one to v

void atomic_dec(atomic_t *v)

Atomically subtract one from v

int atomic_sub_and_test(int i, atomic_t *v)

Atomically subtract i from v and return true if the result is zero; otherwise false

int atomic_add_negative(int i, atomic_t *v)

Atomically add i to v and return true if the result is negative; otherwise false

int atomic_dec_and_test(atomic_t *v)

Atomically decrement v by one and return true if zero; false otherwise

int atomic_inc_and_test(atomic_t *v)

Atomically increment v by one and return true if the result is zero; false otherwise


The atomic operations are typically implemented as inline functions with inline assembly (apparently, kernel developers like inlines). In the case where a specific function is inherently atomic, the given function is usually just a macro. For example, on most sane architectures, a word-sized read is always atomic. That is, a read of a single word cannot complete in the middle of a write to that word. The read will always return the word in a consistent state, either before or after the write completes, but never in the middle. Consequently, atomic_read() is usually just a macro returning the integer value of the atomic_t.

Atomicity Versus Ordering

The preceding discussion on atomic reading begs a discussion on the differences between atomicity and ordering. As discussed, a word-sized read will always occur atomically. It will never interleave with a write to the same word; the read will always return the word in a consistent stateperhaps before the write completed, perhaps after, but never during. For example, if an integer is initially 42 and then set to 365, a read on the integer will always return 42 or 365 and never some commingling of the two values. This is atomicity.

It might be that your code wants something more than this, perhaps for the read to always occur before the pending write. This is not atomicity, but ordering. Atomicity ensures that instructions occur without interruption and that they complete either in their entirety or not at all. Ordering, on the other hand, ensures that the desired order of two or more instructionseven if they are to occur in separate threads of execution or even separate processorsis preserved.

The atomic operations discussed in this section guarantee only atomicity. Ordering is enforced via barrier operations, which we will discuss later in this chapter.


In your code, it is usually preferred to choose atomic operations over more complicated locking mechanisms. On most architectures, one or two atomic operations incur less overhead and less cache-line thrashing than a more complicated synchronization method. As with any performance-sensitive code, however, testing multiple approaches is always smart.

Atomic Bitwise Operations

In addition to atomic integer operations, the kernel also provides a family of functions that operate at the bit level. Not surprisingly, they are architecture specific and defined in <asm/bitops.h>.

What may be surprising is that the bitwise functions operate on generic memory addresses. The arguments are a pointer and a bit number. Bit zero is the least significant bit of the given address. On 32-bit machines, bit 31 is the most significant bit and bit 32 is the least significant bit of the following word. There are no limitations on the bit number supplied, although most uses of the functions provide a word and, consequently, a bit number between 0 and 31 (or 63, on 64-bit machines).

Because the functions operate on a generic pointer, there is no equivalent of the atomic integer's atomic_t type. Instead, you can work with a pointer to whatever data you desire. Consider an example:

unsigned long word = 0;

set_bit(0, &word);       /* bit zero is now set (atomically) */
set_bit(1, &word);       /* bit one is now set (atomically) */
printk("%ul\n", word);   /* will print "3" */
clear_bit(1, &word);     /* bit one is now unset (atomically) */
change_bit(0, &word);    /* bit zero is flipped; now it is unset (atomically) */

/* atomically sets bit zero and returns the previous value (zero) */
if (test_and_set_bit(0, &word)) {
        /* never true     */
}

/* the following is legal; you can mix atomic bit instructions with normal C */
word = 7;

A listing of the standard atomic bit operations is in Table 9.2.

Table 9.2. Listing of Atomic Bitwise Operations

Atomic Bitwise Operation

Description

void set_bit(int nr, void *addr)

Atomically set the nr-th bit starting from addr

void clear_bit(int nr, void *addr)

Atomically clear the nr-th bit starting from addr

void change_bit(int nr, void *addr)

Atomically flip the value of the nr-th bit starting from addr

int test_and_set_bit(int nr, void *addr)

Atomically set the nr-th bit starting from addr and return the previous value

int test_and_clear_bit(int nr, void *addr)

Atomically clear the nr-th bit starting from addr and return the previous value

int test_and_change_bit(int nr, void *addr)

Atomically flip the nr-th bit starting from addr and return the previous value

int test_bit(int nr, void *addr)

Atomically return the value of the nr-th bit starting from addr


Conveniently, nonatomic versions of all the bitwise functions are also provided. They behave identically to their atomic siblings, except they do not guarantee atomicity and their names are prefixed with double underscores. For example, the nonatomic form of test_bit() is __test_bit(). If you do not require atomicity (say, for example, because a lock already protects your data), these variants of the bitwise functions might be faster.

What the Heck Is a Non-Atomic Bit Operation?

On first glance, the concept of a non-atomic bit operation may not make any sense. Only a single bit is involved, thus there is no possibility of inconsistency. So long as one of the operations succeeds, what else could matter? Sure, ordering might be important, but we are talking about atomicity here. At the end of the day, if the bit has a value that was provided by any of the instructions, we should be good to go, right?

Let's jump back to just what atomicity means. Atomicity means that either instructions succeed in their entirety, uninterrupted, or instructions fail to execute at all. Therefore, if you issue two atomic bit operations, you expect two operations to succeed. Sure, the bit needs to have a consistent and correct value (the specified value from the last successful operation, as suggested in the previous paragraph). Moreover, however, if the other operations succeed, then at some point in time the bit needs to have those intermediate values, too.

For example, assume you issue two atomic bit operations: Initially set the bit and then clear the bit. Without atomic operations, the bit may end up cleared, but it may never have been set. The set operation could occur simultaneously with the clear operation and fail. The clear operation would succeed, and the bit would emerge cleared as intended. With atomic operations, however, the set would actually occurthere would be a moment in time when a read would show the bit as setand then the clear would execute and the bit be zero.

This behavior might be important, especially when ordering comes into play.


The kernel also provides routines to find the first set (or unset) bit starting at a given address:

int find_first_bit(unsigned long *addr, unsigned int size)
int find_first_zero_bit(unsigned long *addr, unsigned int size)

Both functions take a pointer as their first argument and the number of bits in total to search as their second. They return the bit number of the first set or first unset bit, respectively. If your code is searching only a word, the routines __ffs() and ffz(), which take a single parameter of the word in which to search, are optimal.

Unlike the atomic integer operations, code typically has no choice whether to use the bitwise operationsthey are the only portable way to set a specific bit. The only question is whether to use the atomic or nonatomic variants. If your code is inherently safe from race conditions, you can use the nonatomic versions, which might be faster depending on the architecture.

    Team LiB
    Previous Section Next Section