Skip to content

[libc++] fix atomic::wait memory order #146267

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

huixie90
Copy link
Member

@huixie90 huixie90 commented Jun 29, 2025

Fixes #109290

See the GH issue for the details. In conclusion, we have two issues in the atomic<T>::wait when T does not match our contention_t:

  • We don't have a total single order which can leads to missed notification based on the Herd7 simulation on relaxed architectural like PowerPC
  • We assumed the platform wait (futex_wait/__ulock_wait) has seq_cst barrier internally but there is no such guarantee

@huixie90 huixie90 requested a review from a team as a code owner June 29, 2025 10:44
@llvmbot llvmbot added the libc++ libc++ C++ Standard Library. Not GNU libstdc++. Not libc++abi. label Jun 29, 2025
@llvmbot
Copy link
Member

llvmbot commented Jun 29, 2025

@llvm/pr-subscribers-libcxx

Author: Hui (huixie90)

Changes

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/146267.diff

1 Files Affected:

  • (modified) libcxx/src/atomic.cpp (+3-2)
diff --git a/libcxx/src/atomic.cpp b/libcxx/src/atomic.cpp
index c1af8d6f95aae..585fd1f538e46 100644
--- a/libcxx/src/atomic.cpp
+++ b/libcxx/src/atomic.cpp
@@ -151,8 +151,9 @@ __libcpp_contention_monitor_for_wait(__cxx_atomic_contention_t volatile* /*__con
 static void __libcpp_contention_wait(__cxx_atomic_contention_t volatile* __contention_state,
                                      __cxx_atomic_contention_t const volatile* __platform_state,
                                      __cxx_contention_t __old_value) {
-  __cxx_atomic_fetch_add(__contention_state, __cxx_contention_t(1), memory_order_seq_cst);
+  __cxx_atomic_fetch_add(__contention_state, __cxx_contention_t(1), memory_order_relaxed);
   // We sleep as long as the monitored value hasn't changed.
+  __cxx_atomic_thread_fence(memory_order_seq_cst);
   __libcpp_platform_wait_on_address(__platform_state, __old_value);
   __cxx_atomic_fetch_sub(__contention_state, __cxx_contention_t(1), memory_order_release);
 }
@@ -163,7 +164,7 @@ static void __libcpp_contention_wait(__cxx_atomic_contention_t volatile* __conte
 static void __libcpp_atomic_notify(void const volatile* __location) {
   auto const __entry = __libcpp_contention_state(__location);
   // The value sequence laundering happens on the next line below.
-  __cxx_atomic_fetch_add(&__entry->__platform_state, __cxx_contention_t(1), memory_order_release);
+  __cxx_atomic_fetch_add(&__entry->__platform_state, __cxx_contention_t(1), memory_order_seq_cst);
   __libcpp_contention_notify(
       &__entry->__contention_state,
       &__entry->__platform_state,

@aharrison24
Copy link

Thanks for taking this issue on! This looks like a correct implementation of "Option 1a" from the original issue I raised. That's been verified by three separate people using Herd, Dartagnan and GenMC respectively, so we're relatively sure it's doing the right thing at this point!

@@ -163,7 +164,7 @@ static void __libcpp_contention_wait(__cxx_atomic_contention_t volatile* __conte
static void __libcpp_atomic_notify(void const volatile* __location) {
auto const __entry = __libcpp_contention_state(__location);
// The value sequence laundering happens on the next line below.
__cxx_atomic_fetch_add(&__entry->__platform_state, __cxx_contention_t(1), memory_order_release);
__cxx_atomic_fetch_add(&__entry->__platform_state, __cxx_contention_t(1), memory_order_seq_cst);

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not familiar with LLVM coding conventions, but would it be worth adding a note here about the fact that there are no platform guarantees of a memory barrier in the platform wait implementation?

Copy link
Member

@ldionne ldionne left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, but +1 about adding a comment.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
libc++ libc++ C++ Standard Library. Not GNU libstdc++. Not libc++abi.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[libc++] Incorrect memory order in atomic wait
4 participants