On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 05:42:15PM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 11/28/2011 06:02 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
> > -  unsigned int ret = bar->generation & ~3;
> > -  /* Do we need any barrier here or is __sync_add_and_fetch acting
> > -     as the needed LoadLoad barrier already?  */
> > -  ret += __sync_add_and_fetch (&bar->awaited, -1) == 0;
> > +  unsigned int ret = __atomic_load_4 (&bar->generation, MEMMODEL_ACQUIRE) 
> > & ~3;
> > +  ret += __atomic_add_fetch (&bar->awaited, -1, MEMMODEL_ACQ_REL) == 0;
> 
> Given that the read from bar->generation is ACQ, we don't need a duplicate 
> barrier from the REL on the atomic add.  I believe both can be 
> MEMMODEL_ACQUIRE
> both in order to force the ordering of these two memops, as well as force 
> these
> to happen before anything subsequent.

I tried with MEMMODEL_ACQUIRE and ran force-parallel-6.exe, the test
that seems most sensitive to barrier problems, many times, and it hangs
occasionally in futex_wait called via gomp_team_barrier_wait_end.

I believe that threads can't be allowed to exit from
gomp_{,team_}barrier_wait without hitting a release barrier, and
perhaps from gomp_barrier_wait_last too.  gomp_barrier_wait_start is a
convenient point to insert the barrier, and a minimal change from the
old code using __sync_add_and_fetch.  I can add a comment. ;-)

-- 
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM

Reply via email to