问题
From C++ Concurrency in Action:
difference between std::atomic and std::atomic_flag is that std::atomic may not be lock-free; the implementation may have to acquire a mutex internally in order to ensure the atomicity of the operations
I wonder why. If atomic_flag is guaranteed to be lock-free, why isn't it guaranteed for atomic<bool>
as well?
Is this because of the member function compare_exchange_weak
? I know that some machines lack a single compare-and-exchange instruction, is that the reason?
回答1:
First of all, you are perfectly allowed to have something like std::atomic<very_nontrivial_large_structure>
, so std::atomic
as such cannot generally be guaranteed to be lock-free (although most specializations for trivial types like bool
or int
probably could, on most systems). But that is somewhat unrelated.
The exact reasoning why atomic_flag
and nothing else must be lock-free is given in the Note in N2427/29.3:
Hence the operations must be address-free. No other type requires lock-free operations, and hence the atomic_flag type is the minimum hardware-implemented type needed to conform to this standard. The remaining types can be emulated with atomic_flag, though with less than ideal properties.
In other words, it's the minimum thing that must be guaranteed on every platform, so it's possible to implement the standard correctly.
回答2:
The standard does not garantee atomic objects are lock-free. On a platform that doesn't provide lock-free atomic operations for a type T
, std::atomic<T>
objects may be implemented using a mutex, which wouldn't be lock-free. In that case, any containers using these objects in their implementation would not be lock-free either.
The standard provide an opportunity to check if an std::atomic<T>
variable is lock-free: you can use var.is_lock_free()
or atomic_is_lock_free(&var)
. For basic types such as int, there is also macros provided (e.g. ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE
) which specify if lock-free atomic access to that type is available.
std::atomic_flag
is an atomic boolean type. Almost always for boolean
type it's not needed to use mutex or another way for synchronization.
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/30256472/why-only-stdatomic-flag-is-guaranteed-to-be-lock-free