1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
|
---
parent: Extended API
nav_order: 0
---
# Memory model
Standard C++ presents a view that the cost to synchronize threads is uniform and low.
CUDA C++ is different: the cost to synchronize threads grows as threads are further apart.
It is low across threads within a block, but high across arbitrary threads in the system running on multiple GPUs and CPUs.
To account for non-uniform thread synchronization costs that are not always low, CUDA C++ extends the standard C++ memory model and concurrency facilities in the `cuda::` namespace with **thread scopes**, retaining the syntax and semantics of standard C++ by default.
## Thread Scopes
A _thread scope_ specifies the kind of threads that can synchronize with each other using synchronization primitive such as [`atomic`] or [`barrier`].
```cuda
namespace cuda {
enum thread_scope {
thread_scope_system,
thread_scope_device,
thread_scope_block,
thread_scope_thread
};
} // namespace cuda
```
[`atomic`]: synchronization_primitives/atomic.md
[`barrier`]: synchronization_primitives/barrier.md
### Scope Relationships
Each program thread is related to each other program thread by one or more thread scope relations:
- Each thread in the system is related to each other thread in the system by the *system* thread scope: `thread_scope_system`.
- Each GPU thread is related to each other GPU thread in the same CUDA device and within the same [memory synchronization domain](https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/cuda-c-programming-guide/index.html#memory-synchronization-domains) by the *device* thread scope: `thread_scope_device`.
- Each GPU thread is related to each other GPU thread in the same CUDA thread block by the *block* thread scope: `thread_scope_block`.
- Each thread is related to itself by the `thread` thread scope: `thread_scope_thread`.
## Synchronization primitives
Types in namespaces `std::` and `cuda::std::` have the same behavior as corresponding types in namespace `cuda::` when instantiated with a scope of `cuda::thread_scope_system`.
## Atomicity
An atomic operation is atomic at the scope it specifies if:
- it specifies a scope other than `thread_scope_system`, **or**
the scope is `thread_scope_system` and:
- it affects an object in [unified memory] and [`concurrentManagedAccess`] is `1`, **or**
- it affects an object in CPU memory and [`hostNativeAtomicSupported`] is `1`, **or**
- it is a load or store that affects a naturally-aligned object of sizes `1`, `2`, `4`, or `8` bytes on [mapped memory], **or**
- it affects an object in GPU memory and only GPU threads access it.
[mapped memory]: https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/cuda-c-programming-guide/index.html#mapped-memory
Refer to the [CUDA programming guide] for more information on [unified memory], [mapped memory], CPU memory, and GPU peer memory.
[mapped memory]: https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/cuda-c-programming-guide/index.html#mapped-memory
[unified memory]: https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/cuda-c-programming-guide/index.html#um-unified-memory-programming-hd
[CUDA programming guide]: https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/cuda-c-programming-guide/index.html
[`concurrentManagedAccess`]: https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/cuda-runtime-api/structcudaDeviceProp.html#structcudaDeviceProp_116f9619ccc85e93bc456b8c69c80e78b
[`hostNativeAtomicSupported`]: https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/cuda-runtime-api/structcudaDeviceProp.html#structcudaDeviceProp_1ef82fd7d1d0413c7d6f33287e5b6306f
## Data Races
Modify [intro.races paragraph 21] of ISO/IEC IS 14882 (the C++ Standard) as follows:
> The execution of a program contains a data race if it contains two potentially concurrent conflicting actions, at least one of which is not atomic ***at a scope that includes the thread that performed the other operation***, and neither happens before the other, except for the special case for signal handlers described below. Any such data race results in undefined behavior. [...]
Modify [thread.barrier.class paragraph 4] of ISO/IEC IS 14882 (the C++ Standard) as follows:
> 4. Concurrent invocations of the member functions of `barrier`, other than its destructor, do not introduce data races ***as if they were atomic operations***. [...]
Modify [thread.latch.class paragraph 2] of ISO/IEC IS 14882 (the C++ Standard) as follows:
> 2. Concurrent invocations of the member functions of `latch`, other than its destructor, do not introduce data races ***as if they were atomic operations***.
Modify [thread.sema.cnt paragraph 3] of ISO/IEC IS 14882 (the C++ Standard) as follows:
> 3. Concurrent invocations of the member functions of `counting_semaphore`, other than its destructor, do not introduce data races ***as if they were atomic operations***.
Modify [thread.stoptoken.intro paragraph 5] of ISO/IEC IS 14882 (the C++ Standard) as follows:
> Calls to the functions request_stop, stop_requested, and stop_possible do not introduce data races ***as if they were atomic operations***. [...]
[thread.stoptoken.intro paragraph 5]: https://eel.is/c++draft/thread#stoptoken.intro-5
Modify [atomics.fences paragraph 2 through 4] of ISO/IEC IS 14882 (the C++ Standard) as follows:
> A release fence A synchronizes with an acquire fence B if there exist atomic
> operations X and Y, both operating on some atomic object M, such that A is
> sequenced before X, X modifies M, Y is sequenced before B, and Y reads the
> value written by X or a value written by any side effect in the hypothetical
> release sequence X would head if it were a release operation,
> ***and each operation (A, B, X, and Y) specifies a scope that includes the thread that performed each other operation***.
> A release fence A synchronizes with an atomic operation B that performs an
> acquire operation on an atomic object M if there exists an atomic operation X
> such that A is sequenced before X, X modifies M, and B reads the value
> written by X or a value written by any side effect in the hypothetical
> release sequence X would head if it were a release operation,
> ***and each operation (A, B, and X) specifies a scope that includes the thread that performed each other operation***.
> An atomic operation A that is a release operation on an atomic object M
> synchronizes with an acquire fence B if there exists some atomic operation X
> on M such that X is sequenced before B and reads the value written by A or a
> value written by any side effect in the release sequence headed by A,
> ***and each operation (A, B, and X) specifies a scope that includes the thread that performed each other operation***.
## Example: Message Passing
The following example passes a message stored to the `x` variable by a thread in block `0` to a thread in block `1` via the flag `f`:
<table class="display">
<tr class="header"><td colspan="2" markdown="span" align="center">
`int x = 0;`<br>
`int f = 0;`
</td></tr>
<tr class="header">
<td markdown="span" align="center">
**Thread 0 Block 0**
</td><td markdown="span" align="center">
**Thread 0 Block 1**
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td markdown="span">
`x = 42;`<br>
`cuda::atomic_ref<int, cuda::thread_scope_device> flag(f);`<br>
`flag.store(1, memory_order_release);`
</td>
<td markdown="span">
`cuda::atomic_ref<int, cuda::thread_scope_device> flag(f);`<br>
`while(flag.load(memory_order_acquire) != 1);`<br>
`assert(x == 42);`
</td>
</tr>
</table>
In the following variation of the previous example, two threads concurrently access the `f` object without synchronization, which leads to a **data race**, and exhibits **undefined behavior**:
<table>
<tr><td colspan="2" markdown="span" align="center">
`int x = 0;`<br>
`int f = 0;`
</td></tr>
<tr>
<td markdown="span" align="center">
**Thread 0 Block 0**
</td><td markdown="span" align="center">
**Thread 0 Block 1**
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td markdown="span">
`x = 42;`<br>
`cuda::atomic_ref<int, cuda::thread_scope_block> flag(f);`<br>
`flag.store(1, memory_order_release); // UB: data race`
</td>
<td markdown="span">
`cuda::atomic_ref<int, cuda::thread_scope_device> flag(f);`<br>
`while(flag.load(memory_order_acquire) != 1); // UB: data race`<br>
`assert(x == 42);`
</td>
</tr>
</table>
While the memory operations on `f` - the store and the loads - are atomic, the scope of the store operation is "block scope". Since the store is performed by Thread 0 of Block 0, it only includes all other threads of Block 0. However, the thread doing the loads is in Block 1, i.e., it is not in a scope included by the store operation performed in Block 0, causing the store and the load to not be "atomic", and introducing a data-race.
For more examples see the [PTX memory consistency model litmus tests].
[PTX memory consistency model litmus tests]: https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/parallel-thread-execution/index.html#axioms
[intro.races paragraph 21]: https://eel.is/c++draft/intro.races#21
[thread.barrier.class paragraph 4]: https://eel.is/c++draft/thread.barrier.class#4
[thread.latch.class paragraph 2]: https://eel.is/c++draft/thread.latch.class#2
[thread.sema.cnt paragraph 3]: https://eel.is/c++draft/thread.sema.cnt#3
[atomics.fences paragraph 2 through 4]: https://eel.is/c++draft/atomics.fences#2
|
