agora inbox for [email protected]help / color / mirror / Atom feed
[PATCH v48 1/7] Make index_concurrently_create_copy more general 203+ messages / 2 participants [nested] [flat]
* [PATCH v48 1/7] Make index_concurrently_create_copy more general @ 2026-03-24 18:02 Álvaro Herrera <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Álvaro Herrera @ 2026-03-24 18:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Add a 'boolean concurrent' option, and make it work for both cases. Also rename it to index_create_copy. This allows it to be reused for other purposes -- specifically, for REPACK CONCURRENTLY. With the CONCURRENTLY option, REPACK cannot simply swap the heap file and rebuild its indexes. Instead, it needs to build a separate set of indexes (including system catalog entries) *before* the actual swap, to reduce the time AccessExclusiveLock needs to be held for. This approach is different from what CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY does. Per a suggestion from Mihail Nikalayeu. Author: Antonin Houska <[email protected]> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/41104.1754922120@localhost --- src/backend/catalog/index.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++------------- src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c | 15 +++++++----- src/backend/nodes/makefuncs.c | 9 ++++---- src/include/catalog/index.h | 7 +++--- src/include/nodes/makefuncs.h | 4 +++- 5 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/catalog/index.c b/src/backend/catalog/index.c index 1ccfa687f05..b86ad73c626 100644 --- a/src/backend/catalog/index.c +++ b/src/backend/catalog/index.c @@ -1289,17 +1289,17 @@ index_create(Relation heapRelation, } /* - * index_concurrently_create_copy + * index_create_copy * - * Create concurrently an index based on the definition of the one provided by - * caller. The index is inserted into catalogs and needs to be built later - * on. This is called during concurrent reindex processing. + * Create an index based on the definition of the one provided by caller. The + * index is inserted into catalogs. If 'concurrently' is TRUE, it needs to be + * built later on; otherwise it's built immediately. * * "tablespaceOid" is the tablespace to use for this index. */ Oid -index_concurrently_create_copy(Relation heapRelation, Oid oldIndexId, - Oid tablespaceOid, const char *newName) +index_create_copy(Relation heapRelation, bool concurrently, + Oid oldIndexId, Oid tablespaceOid, const char *newName) { Relation indexRelation; IndexInfo *oldInfo, @@ -1318,6 +1318,7 @@ index_concurrently_create_copy(Relation heapRelation, Oid oldIndexId, List *indexColNames = NIL; List *indexExprs = NIL; List *indexPreds = NIL; + int flags = 0; indexRelation = index_open(oldIndexId, RowExclusiveLock); @@ -1328,7 +1329,7 @@ index_concurrently_create_copy(Relation heapRelation, Oid oldIndexId, * Concurrent build of an index with exclusion constraints is not * supported. */ - if (oldInfo->ii_ExclusionOps != NULL) + if (oldInfo->ii_ExclusionOps != NULL && concurrently) ereport(ERROR, (errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED), errmsg("concurrent index creation for exclusion constraints is not supported"))); @@ -1384,9 +1385,7 @@ index_concurrently_create_copy(Relation heapRelation, Oid oldIndexId, } /* - * Build the index information for the new index. Note that rebuild of - * indexes with exclusion constraints is not supported, hence there is no - * need to fill all the ii_Exclusion* fields. + * Build the index information for the new index. */ newInfo = makeIndexInfo(oldInfo->ii_NumIndexAttrs, oldInfo->ii_NumIndexKeyAttrs, @@ -1395,10 +1394,13 @@ index_concurrently_create_copy(Relation heapRelation, Oid oldIndexId, indexPreds, oldInfo->ii_Unique, oldInfo->ii_NullsNotDistinct, - false, /* not ready for inserts */ - true, + !concurrently, /* isready */ + concurrently, /* concurrent */ indexRelation->rd_indam->amsummarizing, - oldInfo->ii_WithoutOverlaps); + oldInfo->ii_WithoutOverlaps, + oldInfo->ii_ExclusionOps, + oldInfo->ii_ExclusionProcs, + oldInfo->ii_ExclusionStrats); /* * Extract the list of column names and the column numbers for the new @@ -1436,6 +1438,9 @@ index_concurrently_create_copy(Relation heapRelation, Oid oldIndexId, stattargets[i].isnull = isnull; } + if (concurrently) + flags = INDEX_CREATE_SKIP_BUILD | INDEX_CREATE_CONCURRENT; + /* * Now create the new index. * @@ -1459,7 +1464,7 @@ index_concurrently_create_copy(Relation heapRelation, Oid oldIndexId, indcoloptions->values, stattargets, reloptionsDatum, - INDEX_CREATE_SKIP_BUILD | INDEX_CREATE_CONCURRENT, + flags, 0, true, /* allow table to be a system catalog? */ false, /* is_internal? */ @@ -2453,7 +2458,8 @@ BuildIndexInfo(Relation index) indexStruct->indisready, false, index->rd_indam->amsummarizing, - indexStruct->indisexclusion && indexStruct->indisunique); + indexStruct->indisexclusion && indexStruct->indisunique, + NULL, NULL, NULL); /* fill in attribute numbers */ for (i = 0; i < numAtts; i++) @@ -2513,7 +2519,8 @@ BuildDummyIndexInfo(Relation index) indexStruct->indisready, false, index->rd_indam->amsummarizing, - indexStruct->indisexclusion && indexStruct->indisunique); + indexStruct->indisexclusion && indexStruct->indisunique, + NULL, NULL, NULL); /* fill in attribute numbers */ for (i = 0; i < numAtts; i++) diff --git a/src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c b/src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c index 373e8234794..4a2d21915b1 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/indexcmds.c @@ -244,7 +244,8 @@ CheckIndexCompatible(Oid oldId, */ indexInfo = makeIndexInfo(numberOfAttributes, numberOfAttributes, accessMethodId, NIL, NIL, false, false, - false, false, amsummarizing, isWithoutOverlaps); + false, false, amsummarizing, isWithoutOverlaps, + NULL, NULL, NULL); typeIds = palloc_array(Oid, numberOfAttributes); collationIds = palloc_array(Oid, numberOfAttributes); opclassIds = palloc_array(Oid, numberOfAttributes); @@ -931,7 +932,8 @@ DefineIndex(ParseState *pstate, !concurrent, concurrent, amissummarizing, - stmt->iswithoutoverlaps); + stmt->iswithoutoverlaps, + NULL, NULL, NULL); typeIds = palloc_array(Oid, numberOfAttributes); collationIds = palloc_array(Oid, numberOfAttributes); @@ -3989,10 +3991,11 @@ ReindexRelationConcurrently(const ReindexStmt *stmt, Oid relationOid, const Rein tablespaceid = indexRel->rd_rel->reltablespace; /* Create new index definition based on given index */ - newIndexId = index_concurrently_create_copy(heapRel, - idx->indexId, - tablespaceid, - concurrentName); + newIndexId = index_create_copy(heapRel, + true, + idx->indexId, + tablespaceid, + concurrentName); /* * Now open the relation of the new index, a session-level lock is diff --git a/src/backend/nodes/makefuncs.c b/src/backend/nodes/makefuncs.c index 3cd35c5c457..8d23aa917e5 100644 --- a/src/backend/nodes/makefuncs.c +++ b/src/backend/nodes/makefuncs.c @@ -834,7 +834,8 @@ IndexInfo * makeIndexInfo(int numattrs, int numkeyattrs, Oid amoid, List *expressions, List *predicates, bool unique, bool nulls_not_distinct, bool isready, bool concurrent, bool summarizing, - bool withoutoverlaps) + bool withoutoverlaps, Oid *exclusion_ops, Oid *exclusion_procs, + uint16 *exclusion_strats) { IndexInfo *n = makeNode(IndexInfo); @@ -863,9 +864,9 @@ makeIndexInfo(int numattrs, int numkeyattrs, Oid amoid, List *expressions, n->ii_PredicateState = NULL; /* exclusion constraints */ - n->ii_ExclusionOps = NULL; - n->ii_ExclusionProcs = NULL; - n->ii_ExclusionStrats = NULL; + n->ii_ExclusionOps = exclusion_ops; + n->ii_ExclusionProcs = exclusion_procs; + n->ii_ExclusionStrats = exclusion_strats; /* speculative inserts */ n->ii_UniqueOps = NULL; diff --git a/src/include/catalog/index.h b/src/include/catalog/index.h index a38e95bc0eb..ed9e4c37d27 100644 --- a/src/include/catalog/index.h +++ b/src/include/catalog/index.h @@ -101,10 +101,9 @@ extern Oid index_create(Relation heapRelation, #define INDEX_CONSTR_CREATE_REMOVE_OLD_DEPS (1 << 4) #define INDEX_CONSTR_CREATE_WITHOUT_OVERLAPS (1 << 5) -extern Oid index_concurrently_create_copy(Relation heapRelation, - Oid oldIndexId, - Oid tablespaceOid, - const char *newName); +extern Oid index_create_copy(Relation heapRelation, bool concurrently, + Oid oldIndexId, Oid tablespaceOid, + const char *newName); extern void index_concurrently_build(Oid heapRelationId, Oid indexRelationId); diff --git a/src/include/nodes/makefuncs.h b/src/include/nodes/makefuncs.h index bf54d39feb0..40ec249a7a1 100644 --- a/src/include/nodes/makefuncs.h +++ b/src/include/nodes/makefuncs.h @@ -99,7 +99,9 @@ extern IndexInfo *makeIndexInfo(int numattrs, int numkeyattrs, Oid amoid, List *expressions, List *predicates, bool unique, bool nulls_not_distinct, bool isready, bool concurrent, - bool summarizing, bool withoutoverlaps); + bool summarizing, bool withoutoverlaps, + Oid *exclusion_ops, Oid *exclusion_procs, + uint16 *exclusion_strats); extern Node *makeStringConst(char *str, int location); extern DefElem *makeDefElem(char *name, Node *arg, int location); -- 2.47.3 --qfkt2ktdpcfeypib Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="v48-0002-Give-options-parameter-to-table_delete-table_upd.patch" ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic @ 2026-07-09 19:20 Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 203+ messages in thread From: Nathan Bossart @ 2026-07-09 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw) --- src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c | 51 ++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c index 37a21ffaf1a..17e98c9efdc 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/sinvaladt.c @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ #include "storage/procsignal.h" #include "storage/shmem.h" #include "storage/sinvaladt.h" -#include "storage/spin.h" #include "storage/subsystems.h" /* @@ -87,19 +86,10 @@ * has no need to touch anyone's ProcState, except in the infrequent cases * when SICleanupQueue is needed. The only point of overlap is that * the writer wants to change maxMsgNum while readers need to read it. - * We deal with that by having a spinlock that readers must take for just - * long enough to read maxMsgNum, while writers take it for just long enough - * to write maxMsgNum. (The exact rule is that you need the spinlock to - * read maxMsgNum if you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need the - * spinlock to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) - * - * Note: since maxMsgNum is an int and hence presumably atomically readable/ - * writable, the spinlock might seem unnecessary. The reason it is needed - * is to provide a memory barrier: we need to be sure that messages written - * to the array are actually there before maxMsgNum is increased, and that - * readers will see that data after fetching maxMsgNum. Multiprocessors - * that have weak memory-ordering guarantees can fail without the memory - * barrier instructions that are included in the spinlock sequences. + * We deal with that by making maxMsgNum an atomic variable. (The exact rule + * is that you need to use a barrier-providing accessor to read maxMsgNum if + * you are not holding SInvalWriteLock, and you need a barrier-providing + * accessor to write maxMsgNum unless you are holding both locks.) */ @@ -169,11 +159,9 @@ typedef struct SISeg * General state information */ int minMsgNum; /* oldest message still needed */ - int maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ + pg_atomic_uint32 maxMsgNum; /* next message number to be assigned */ int nextThreshold; /* # of messages to call SICleanupQueue */ - slock_t msgnumLock; /* spinlock protecting maxMsgNum */ - /* * Circular buffer holding shared-inval messages */ @@ -244,11 +232,10 @@ SharedInvalShmemInit(void *arg) { int i; - /* Clear message counters, init spinlock */ + /* Clear message counters */ shmInvalBuffer->minMsgNum = 0; - shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum = 0; + pg_atomic_init_u32(&shmInvalBuffer->maxMsgNum, 0); shmInvalBuffer->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; - SpinLockInit(&shmInvalBuffer->msgnumLock); /* The buffer[] array is initially all unused, so we need not fill it */ @@ -306,7 +293,7 @@ SharedInvalBackendInit(bool sendOnly) /* mark myself active, with all extant messages already read */ stateP->procPid = MyProcPid; - stateP->nextMsgNum = segP->maxMsgNum; + stateP->nextMsgNum = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); stateP->resetState = false; stateP->signaled = false; stateP->hasMessages = false; @@ -402,7 +389,7 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) */ for (;;) { - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs + nthistime > MAXNUMMESSAGES || numMsgs >= segP->nextThreshold) SICleanupQueue(true, nthistime); @@ -413,17 +400,15 @@ SIInsertDataEntries(const SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int n) /* * Insert new message(s) into proper slot of circular buffer */ - max = segP->maxMsgNum; + max = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); while (nthistime-- > 0) { segP->buffer[max % MAXNUMMESSAGES] = *data++; max++; } - /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - segP->maxMsgNum = max; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Update current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + pg_atomic_write_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, max); /* * Now that the maxMsgNum change is globally visible, we give everyone @@ -509,10 +494,8 @@ SIGetDataEntries(SharedInvalidationMessage *data, int datasize) */ stateP->hasMessages = false; - /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using spinlock */ - SpinLockAcquire(&segP->msgnumLock); - max = segP->maxMsgNum; - SpinLockRelease(&segP->msgnumLock); + /* Fetch current value of maxMsgNum using barrier */ + max = pg_atomic_read_membarrier_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); if (stateP->resetState) { @@ -598,7 +581,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * backends here it is possible for them to keep sending messages without * a problem even when they are the only active backend. */ - min = segP->maxMsgNum; + min = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum); minsig = min - SIG_THRESHOLD; lowbound = min - MAXNUMMESSAGES + minFree; @@ -644,7 +627,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) if (min >= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND) { segP->minMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; - segP->maxMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; + pg_atomic_fetch_sub_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum, MSGNUMWRAPAROUND); for (i = 0; i < segP->numProcs; i++) segP->procState[segP->pgprocnos[i]].nextMsgNum -= MSGNUMWRAPAROUND; } @@ -653,7 +636,7 @@ SICleanupQueue(bool callerHasWriteLock, int minFree) * Determine how many messages are still in the queue, and set the * threshold at which we should repeat SICleanupQueue(). */ - numMsgs = segP->maxMsgNum - segP->minMsgNum; + numMsgs = pg_atomic_read_u32(&segP->maxMsgNum) - segP->minMsgNum; if (numMsgs < CLEANUP_MIN) segP->nextThreshold = CLEANUP_MIN; else -- 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155) --Ot5x3ffkWEuxilWO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=v1-0002-convert-ParallelBitmapHeapState-state-to-an-atomi.patch ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 203+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-07-09 19:20 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 203+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2026-03-24 18:02 [PATCH v48 1/7] Make index_concurrently_create_copy more general Álvaro Herrera <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> 2026-07-09 19:20 [PATCH v1 1/8] convert SISeg->maxMsgNum to an atomic Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox