is assignment operator '=' atomic?

Alcott picture Alcott · Nov 28, 2011 · Viewed 13.9k times · Source

I'm implementing Inter-Thread Communication using global variable.

//global var
volatile bool is_true = true;

//thread 1
void thread_1()
{
    while(1){
        int rint = rand() % 10;
        if(is_true) {
            cout << "thread_1: "<< rint <<endl;  //thread_1 prints some stuff
            if(rint == 3)
                is_true = false;  //here, tells thread_2 to start printing stuff
        }
    }
}

//thread 2
void thread_2()
{
    while(1){
        int rint = rand() % 10;
        if(! is_true) {  //if is_true == false
            cout << "thread_1: "<< rint <<endl;  //thread_2 prints some stuff
            if(rint == 7)  //7
                is_true = true;  //here, tells thread_1 to start printing stuff
        }
    }
}

int main()
{
    HANDLE t1 = CreateThread(0,0, thread_1, 0,0,0);
    HANDLE t2 = CreateThread(0,0, thread_2, 0,0,0);
    Sleep(9999999);
    return 0;
}

Question

In the code above, I use a global var volatile bool is_true to switch printing between thread_1 and thread_2.

I wonder whether it is thread-safe to use assignment operation here?

Answer

Raymond Chen picture Raymond Chen · Nov 28, 2011

This code is not guaranteed to be thread-safe on Win32, since Win32 guarantees atomicity only for properly-aligned 4-byte and pointer-sized values. bool is not guaranteed to be one of those types. (It is typically a 1-byte type.)

For those who demand an actual example of how this could fail:

Suppose that bool is a 1-byte type. Suppose also that your is_true variable happens to be stored adjacent to another bool variable (let's call it other_bool), so that both of them share the same 4-byte line. For concreteness, let's say that is_true is at address 0x1000 and other_bool is at address 0x1001. Suppose that both values are initially false, and one thread decides to update is_true at the same time another thread tries to update other_bool. The following sequence of operations can occur:

  • Thread 1 prepares to set is_true to true by loading the 4-byte value containing is_true and other_bool. Thread 1 reads 0x00000000.
  • Thread 2 prepares to set other_bool to true by loading the 4-byte value containing is_true and other_bool. Thread 2 reads 0x00000000.
  • Thread 1 updates the byte in the 4-byte value corresponding to is_true, producing 0x00000001.
  • Thread 2 updates the byte in the 4-byte value corresponding to other_bool, producing 0x00000100.
  • Thread 1 stores the updated value to memory. is_true is now true and other_bool is now false.
  • Thread 2 stores the updated value to memory. is_true is now false and other_bool is now true.

Observe that at the end this sequence, the update to is_true was lost, because it was overwritten by thread 2, which captured an old value of is_true.

It so happens that x86 is very forgiving of this type of error because it supports byte-granular updates and has a very tight memory model. Other Win32 processors are not as forgiving. RISC chips, for example, often do not support byte-granular updates, and even if they do, they usually have very weak memory models.