From: normalperson@... Date: 2014-06-10T22:00:56+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:63084] [CommonRuby - Feature #8259] Atomic attributes accessors Issue #8259 has been updated by Eric Wong. thedarkone2@gmail.com wrote: > I am all for addition of `ConcurrentHash` or `Concurrent::Array` (these > new data structures would have `cas` and `swap` methods), but for > performance reasons plain old `Hash` and `Array` should be kept > completely un-thread-safe. Does that mean segfaulting the VM on concurrent Hash or Array access is OK? I don't think any current Ruby VM allows that. If we need to prevent segfaults on concurrent access, I suspect we'll need to pay some concurrency costs. Personally, I'm OK if we allow the VM to segfault on concurrent accesses, but I doubt others will agree with me. ---------------------------------------- Feature #8259: Atomic attributes accessors https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8259#change-47157 * Author: Yura Sokolov * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: * Category: * Target version: Ruby 2.1.0 ---------------------------------------- =begin Motivated by this gist (()) and atomic gem I propose Class.attr_atomic which will add methods for atomic swap and CAS: class MyNode attr_accessor :item attr_atomic :successor def initialize(item, successor) @item = item @successor = successor end end node = MyNode.new(i, other_node) # attr_atomic ensures at least #{attr} reader method exists. May be, it should # be sure it does volatile access. node.successor # #{attr}_cas(old_value, new_value) do CAS: atomic compare and swap if node.successor_cas(other_node, new_node) print "there were no interleaving with other threads" end # #{attr}_swap atomically swaps value and returns old value. # It ensures that no other thread interleaves getting old value and setting # new one by cas (or other primitive if exists, like in Java 8) node.successor_swap(new_node) It will be very simple for MRI cause of GIL, and it will use atomic primitives for other implementations. Note: both (({#{attr}_swap})) and (({#{attr}_cas})) should raise an error if instance variable were not explicitly set before. Example for nonblocking queue: (()) Something similar should be proposed for Structs. May be override same method as (({Struct.attr_atomic})) Open question for reader: should (({attr_atomic :my_attr})) ensure that #my_attr reader method exists? Should it guarantee that (({#my_attr})) provides 'volatile' access? May be, (({attr_reader :my_attr})) already ought to provide 'volatile' semantic? May be, semantic of (({@my_attr})) should have volatile semantic (i doubt for that)? =end -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/