Welcome to OGeek Q&A Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

Categories

0 votes
844 views
in Technique[技术] by (71.8m points)

multithreading - On a multicore x86, is a LOCK necessary as a prefix to XCHG?

If mem is a shared memory location, do I need:

XCHG EAX,mem

or:

LOCK XCHG EAX,mem

to do the exchange atomically?

Googling this yields both yes and no answers. Does anyone know this definitively?

See Question&Answers more detail:os

与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

1 Reply

0 votes
by (71.8m points)

Intel's documentation seems pretty clear that it is redundant.

IA-32 Intel? Architecture Software Developer’s Manual Volume 3A: System Programming Guide, Part 1

7.1.2.1 says:

The operations on which the processor automatically follows the LOCK semantics are as follows:

  • When executing an XCHG instruction that references memory.

Similarly,

Intel? 64 and IA-32 Architectures Software Developer’s Manual Volume 2B: Instruction Set Reference, N-Z

XCHG:

If a memory operand is referenced, the processor’s locking protocol is automatically implemented for the duration of the exchange operation, regardless of the presence or absence of the LOCK prefix or of the value of the IOPL.

Note that this doesn't actually meant that the LOCK# signal is asserted whether or not the LOCK prefix is used, 7.1.4 describes how on later processors locking semantics are preserved without a LOCK# if the memory location is cached. Clever, and definitely over my head.


与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
OGeek|极客中国-欢迎来到极客的世界,一个免费开放的程序员编程交流平台!开放,进步,分享!让技术改变生活,让极客改变未来! Welcome to OGeek Q&A Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Click Here to Ask a Question

...