*sending this email again, now in plain text Hi Will,
I'm working at Huawei on verification of atomic primitives. I thought it would be appropriate to write to you because you're mentioned in several papers on ARM concurrency (https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~pes20/papers/topics.html), gcc patches and you're an author of several patches to kernel regarding this. I've recently been looking into our implementation of atomic loads/stores on ARMv7 and found out that we treat stores specially - with LDREXD/STREXD loop - while load is just LDREXD. The latest version of manual (DDI 0406C.d) explicitly prohibits this saying in A3.5.3 that "The way to atomically load two 32-bit quantities is to perform an LDREXD/STREXD sequence, reading and writing the same value, for which the STREXD succeeds, and use the read values." Both GCC and LLVM produce the same code as us (https://godbolt.org/z/bYaWbEbjh). The explanation for this in GCC (https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2012-April/338841.html) given by Richard Earnshaw is based on older version of ARM ARM (before C.c), which says that LDREXDs are atomic: --- C.b +++ C.c In ARMv7, the single-copy atomic processor accesses are *** - memory accesses caused by LDREXD and STREXD instructions to doubleword-aligned locations. + Memory accesses caused by a LDREXD/STREXD to a doubleword-aligned location for which the STREXD succeeds + cause single-copy atomic updates of the doubleword being accessed. Interestingly, prior to issue C.c LDREXD's pseudocode contained one single-copy atomic memory access (0406C.b A8.8.77): MemA[address,8] , whereas now it contains two (0406C.d A8.8.78): MemA[address,4] and MemA[address+4,4]. Also regarding LPAE, there is a discrepancy between prose and pseudocode explanations of atomicity of LDRD/STRD on LPAE. In prose LDRD/STRD are atomic only in locations that might be used to hold translations, while in pseudocode they are always atomic. LLVM doesn't change its code output for LPAE. GCC produces regular LDRD for load and keeps the LDREXD/STREXD loop for store. In the kernel both loads and stores are regular LDRD/STRD. I've ran some litmus tests on a bunch of boards. Here are the results: - cortex-a7 (BCM2836, RK3128), cortex-a9 (Exynos4412) and cortex-a17 (RK3188) - LDRD/STRD are single-copy atomic; - cortex-a5 (MSM8625Q) - LDRD/STRD are not single-copy atomic, but it's enough to use LDEXRD/STRD to fix it: two writers with STRD and one reader with LDEXRD don't produce inconsistent results. Interestingly, on cortex-a9 (without LPAE) regular LDRD/STRD are atomic. Can you shed some light on the situation with LDREXD/STREXD? Why was the manual changed? Do you think we should change implementation in kernel and elsewhere to what manual suggests? Also about LPAE, manual doesn't pose a requirement that all locations in the memory system are 64-bit single-copy atomic - only those that might be used to hold translations, "such as bulk SDRAM". Does this mean we can safely use LDRD/STRD? Related patches/discussion: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2009-December/005934.html https://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-March/157817.html https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2012-April/338781.html https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2016-February/442717.html https://reviews.llvm.org/rGc882eb0723afa9dfe626eebb9699c1871a8bbbab --- Peter
