C++ – Synchronizing access to variable

cmemorymulticoremultithreadingparallel-processing

I need to provide synchronization to some members of a structure.
If the structure is something like this

struct SharedStruct {
    int Value1;
    int Value2;
}

and I have a global variable

SharedStruct obj;

I want that the write from a processor

 obj.Value1 = 5; // Processor B

to be immediately visible to the other processors, so that when I test the value

 if(obj.Value1 == 5) { DoSmth(); } // Processor A
 else DoSmthElse();

to get the new value, not some old value from the cache.
First I though that if I use volatile when writing/reading the values, it is enough. But I read that volatile can't solve this kind o issues.
The members are guaranteed to be properly aligned on 2/4/8 byte boundaries, and writes should be atomic in this case, but I'm not sure how the cache could interfere with this.
Using memory barriers (mfence, sfence, etc.) would be enough ? Or some interlocked operations are required ?
Or maybe something like

lock mov addr, REGISTER

?
The easiest would obviously be some locking mechanism, but speed is critical and can't afford locks 🙁

Edit
Maybe I should clarify a bit. The value is set only once (behaves like a flag). All the other threads need just to read it. That's why I think that it may be a way to force the read of this new value without using locks.

Thanks in advance!

Best Answer

All the other answers here seem to hand wave about the complexities of updating shared variables using mutexes, etc. It is true that you want the update to be atomic. And you could use various OS primitives to ensure that, and that would be good programming style.

However, on most modern processors (certainly the x86), writes of small, aligned scalar values is atomic and immediately visible to other processors due to cache coherency. So in this special case, you don't need all the synchronizing junk; the hardware does the atomic operation for you. Certainly this is safe with 4 byte values (e.g., "int" in 32 bit C compilers).

So you could just initialize Value1 with an uninteresting value (say 0) before you start the parallel threads, and simply write other values there. If the question is exiting the loop on a fixed value (e.g., if value1 == 5) this will be perfectly safe.

If you insist on capturing the first value written, this won't work. But if you have a parallel set of threads, and any value written other than the uninteresting one will do, this is also fine.

Related Solutions

C++ – What are the differences between a pointer variable and a reference variable in C++

A pointer can be re-assigned:

int x = 5;
int y = 6;
int *p;
p = &x;
p = &y;
*p = 10;
assert(x == 5);
assert(y == 10);

A reference cannot be re-bound, and must be bound at initialization:

int x = 5;
int y = 6;
int &q; // error
int &r = x;

A pointer variable has its own identity: a distinct, visible memory address that can be taken with the unary & operator and a certain amount of space that can be measured with the sizeof operator. Using those operators on a reference returns a value corresponding to whatever the reference is bound to; the reference’s own address and size are invisible. Since the reference assumes the identity of the original variable in this way, it is convenient to think of a reference as another name for the same variable.
```
int x = 0;
int &r = x;
int *p = &x;
int *p2 = &r;

assert(p == p2); // &x == &r
assert(&p != &p2);
```

You can have arbitrarily nested pointers to pointers offering extra levels of indirection. References only offer one level of indirection.

int x = 0;
int y = 0;
int *p = &x;
int *q = &y;
int **pp = &p;

**pp = 2;
pp = &q; // *pp is now q
**pp = 4;

assert(y == 4);
assert(x == 2);

A pointer can be assigned nullptr, whereas a reference must be bound to an existing object. If you try hard enough, you can bind a reference to nullptr, but this is undefined and will not behave consistently.

/* the code below is undefined; your compiler may optimise it
 * differently, emit warnings, or outright refuse to compile it */

int &r = *static_cast<int *>(nullptr);

// prints "null" under GCC 10
std::cout
    << (&r != nullptr
        ? "not null" : "null")
    << std::endl;

bool f(int &r) { return &r != nullptr; }

// prints "not null" under GCC 10
std::cout
    << (f(*static_cast<int *>(nullptr))
        ? "not null" : "null")
    << std::endl;

You can, however, have a reference to a pointer whose value is nullptr.

Pointers can iterate over an array; you can use ++ to go to the next item that a pointer is pointing to, and + 4 to go to the 5th element. This is no matter what size the object is that the pointer points to.
A pointer needs to be dereferenced with * to access the memory location it points to, whereas a reference can be used directly. A pointer to a class/struct uses -> to access its members whereas a reference uses a ..
References cannot be put into an array, whereas pointers can be (Mentioned by user @litb)
Const references can be bound to temporaries. Pointers cannot (not without some indirection):
```
const int &x = int(12); // legal C++
int *y = &int(12); // illegal to take the address of a temporary.
```
This makes const & more convenient to use in argument lists and so forth.

Java – When and how should I use a ThreadLocal variable

One possible (and common) use is when you have some object that is not thread-safe, but you want to avoid synchronizing access to that object (I'm looking at you, SimpleDateFormat). Instead, give each thread its own instance of the object.

For example:

public class Foo
{
    // SimpleDateFormat is not thread-safe, so give one to each thread
    private static final ThreadLocal<SimpleDateFormat> formatter = new ThreadLocal<SimpleDateFormat>(){
        @Override
        protected SimpleDateFormat initialValue()
        {
            return new SimpleDateFormat("yyyyMMdd HHmm");
        }
    };

    public String formatIt(Date date)
    {
        return formatter.get().format(date);
    }
}

Documentation.

Best Answer

Related Solutions

C++ – What are the differences between a pointer variable and a reference variable in C++

Java – When and how should I use a ThreadLocal variable

Related Topic