Bug 54006 - __atomic_always_lock_free inconsistent with __GCC_ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE et al. on crisv32 and hppa
Summary: __atomic_always_lock_free inconsistent with __GCC_ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE et al....
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Alias: None
Product: gcc
Classification: Unclassified
Component: target (show other bugs)
Version: 4.8.0
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Not yet assigned to anyone
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-07-17 22:41 UTC by Hans-Peter Nilsson
Modified: 2022-01-20 11:28 UTC (History)
10 users (show)

See Also:
Host:
Target: crisv32-axis-linux-gnu, "crisv32-elf -munaligned-atomic-may-use-library", hppa*-*
Build:
Known to work:
Known to fail:
Last reconfirmed:


Attachments
Testcase suitable for gcc.dg/torture (272 bytes, text/plain)
2012-07-17 22:41 UTC, Hans-Peter Nilsson
Details
Patch using can_compare_and_swap_p but with multiple problems (1.39 KB, text/plain)
2012-07-20 04:16 UTC, Hans-Peter Nilsson
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-07-17 22:41:54 UTC
Created attachment 27820 [details]
Testcase suitable for gcc.dg/torture

Also affecting C++ and libstdc++.

The definition of the macros in the __GCC_ATOMIC_CHAR_LOCK_FREE, __GCC_ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE family is inconsistent with __atomic_always_lock_free.
The latter implies that library calls are always lock-free while the macros just check for presence of certain patterns.  They should call a common function.
See attached test-case, which fails for crisv32-axis-linux-gnu and "crisv32-elf -munaligned-atomic-may-use-library" and likely for e.g. m68k coldfire and definitely for hppa*-* (only library, no patterns).
Comment 1 Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-07-17 22:44:11 UTC
By "the macros just check for presence of certain patterns" I mean the code defining those macros, in c-family/c-cppbuiltin.c:cpp_atomic_builtins.
Comment 2 Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-07-20 04:06:41 UTC
FWIW, cpp_atomic_builtins is called before the target TARGET_INIT_LIBFUNCS is called (at least on the 4.7 branch) so using can_compare_and_swap_p as the / in the common function (as is needed) requires moving some initialization bits to avoid a SEGV.  There be dragons there.  (Not that they shouldn't be slayed, just beware.)
Comment 3 Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-07-20 04:16:20 UTC
Created attachment 27842 [details]
Patch using can_compare_and_swap_p but with multiple problems

Besides the SEGV due to the initialization problem aleady mentioned, this patch codifies the assumption that atomic intrinsic library functions (i.e. libgcc-style) aren't lock-free, which is wrong but at least consistent with the conceptual patch in PR54003.
Comment 4 Nick 2015-05-22 12:20:26 UTC
FYI:
There is also a debian bug [1], an entry in the debian mailing list [2], a related bug in the nghttp2 project [3] (with a cpp code-based workaround [4]) and a similar looking entry at stackoverflow [5].

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=727621
[2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-arm/2013/12/msg00007.html
[3] https://github.com/tatsuhiro-t/nghttp2/issues/86
[4] https://github.com/tatsuhiro-t/nghttp2/commit/ba92935f64627f77d3b9a1439766d83dc0c9f679
[5] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22036396/stdpromise-error-on-cross-compiling
Comment 5 Eric Gallager 2017-07-28 20:29:50 UTC
Testcase compiles, runs, and exits with 0 for me on i386-apple-darwin9.8.0.
Can you try again?

$ /usr/local/bin/gcc -o 54006.exe 54006.c
$ ./54006.exe
$ echo $?
0
$
Comment 6 Hans-Peter Nilsson 2017-07-28 22:19:37 UTC
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, egallager at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Testcase compiles, runs, and exits with 0 for me on i386-apple-darwin9.8.0.

I'm not sure how that target is relevant?

(I forgot to set a target and can't edit the bug at present
other than replying by email, but see the original description
for a list of targets where the test was known to fail or
expected to fail.  Note also that the test is brittle and may be
undesirably optimized to always pass.)

> Can you try again?

Not for a couple of weeks, sorry.

brgds, H-P
Comment 7 Eric Gallager 2017-10-29 11:20:20 UTC
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #6)
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, egallager at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > Testcase compiles, runs, and exits with 0 for me on i386-apple-darwin9.8.0.
> 
> I'm not sure how that target is relevant?
> 
> (I forgot to set a target and can't edit the bug at present
> other than replying by email, but see the original description
> for a list of targets where the test was known to fail or
> expected to fail.  Note also that the test is brittle and may be
> undesirably optimized to always pass.)

oh ok, I missed that part at first; retitling to include the targets.

> 
> > Can you try again?
> 
> Not for a couple of weeks, sorry.
> 
> brgds, H-P
Comment 8 Eric Gallager 2018-08-20 22:35:44 UTC
I guess I'll put it back in UNCONFIRMED instead of leaving it in WAITING...
Comment 9 Eric Gallager 2018-08-20 22:40:27 UTC
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #0)
> Created attachment 27820 [details]
> Testcase suitable for gcc.dg/torture
> 
> See attached test-case, which fails for crisv32-axis-linux-gnu and
> "crisv32-elf -munaligned-atomic-may-use-library" and likely for e.g. m68k
> coldfire and definitely for hppa*-* (only library, no patterns).

cc-ing maintainers for those targets
Comment 10 John David Anglin 2018-08-20 23:06:16 UTC
The test passes on hppa.  The hppa-linux target has a kernel helper to
implement compare and swap.  The hpux target isn't "lock free".

There is a debate as to whether the linux implementation Is "lock free"
or not.  See PR83638.