Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Add design doc for atomic<T> type. (#5101)
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
* Add design doc for atomic<T> type.

* Update design doc.

* Fix.

* More comment on parameters.
  • Loading branch information
csyonghe authored Sep 19, 2024
1 parent 3861be7 commit 1560326
Showing 1 changed file with 116 additions and 0 deletions.
116 changes: 116 additions & 0 deletions docs/proposals/003-atomic-t.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
SP #003 - `Atomic<T>` type
==============


Status
------

Author: Yong He

Status: Design Discussion.

Implementation: N/A

Reviewed by: N/A

Background
----------

HLSL defines atomic intrinsics to work on free references to ordinary values such as `int` and `float`. However, this doesn't translate well to Metal and WebGPU,
which defines `atomic<T>` type and only allow atomic operations to be applied on values of `atomic<T>` types.

Slang's Metal backend follows the same technique in SPIRV-Cross and DXIL->Metal converter that relies on a C++ undefined behavior that casts an ordinary `int*` pointer to a `atomic<int>*` pointer
and then call atomic intrinsic on the reinterpreted pointer. This is fragile and not guaranteed to work in the future.

To make the situation worse, WebGPU bans all possible ways to cast a normal pointer into an `atomic` pointer. In order to provide a truly portable way to define
atomic operations and allow them to be translatable to all targets, we will also need an `atomic<T>` type in Slang that maps to `atomic<T>` in WGSL and Metal, and maps to
`T` for HLSL/SPIRV.


Proposed Approach
-----------------

We define an `Atomic<T>` type that functions as a wrapper of `T` and provides atomic operations:
```
[sealed] interface IAtomicable {}
[sealed] interface IArithmeticAtomicable : IAtomicable {}
[sealed] interface IBitAtomicable : IArithmeticAtomicable {}
extension int : IArithmeticAtomicable {}
extension uint : IArithmeticAtomicable {}
extension int64_t : IBitAtomicable {}
extension uint64_t : IBitAtomicable {}
extension float : IArithmeticAtomicable {}
extension half : IArithmeticAtomicable {}
struct Atomic<T : IAtomicable>
{
T load();
[ref] void store(T newValue); // Question: do we really need this?
[ref] T exchange(T newValue); // returns old value
[ref] T compareExchange(T compareValue, T newValue); // returns old value.
}
extension<T:IArithmeticAtomicable> Atomic<T>
{
[ref] T atomicAdd(T value); // returns original value
[ref] T atomicSub(T value); // returns original value
[ref] T atomicMax(T value); // returns original value
[ref] T atomicMin(T value); // returns original value
[ref] T atomicIncrement();
[ref] T atomicDecrement();
}
extension<T:IBitAtomicable> Atomic<T>
{
[ref] T atomicAnd(T value); // returns original value
[ref] T atomicOr(T value); // returns original value
[ref] T atomicXor(T value); // returns original value
}
```

We allow `Atomic<T>` to be defined anywhere: as struct fields, as array elements, as elements of `RWStructuredBuffer` types,
or as local, global and groupshared variable types or function parameter types. For example, in global memory:

```hlsl
struct MyType
{
int ordinaryValue;
Atomic<int> atomicValue;
}
RWStructuredBuffer<MyType> atomicBuffer;
void main()
{
atomicBuffer[0].atomicValue.atomicAdd(1);
printf("%d", atomicBuffer[0].atomicValue.load());
}
```

In groupshared memory:

```hlsl
void main()
{
groupshared atomic<int> c;
c.atomicAdd(1);
}
```

When generating WGSL code where `atomic<T>` isn't allowed on local variables or other illegal address spaces, we will lower the type
into its underlying type. The use of atomic type in these positions will simply have no meaning. A caveat is what the semantics should be
when there is a function that takes `inout Atomic<T>` as parameter. This likely need to be a warning or error.

This should be handled by a legalization pass similar to `lowerBufferElementTypeToStorageType` but operates
in the opposite direction: the "loaded" value from a buffer is converted into an atomic-free type, and storing a value leads to an
atomic store at the corresponding locations.

For non-WGSL/Metal targets, we can simply lower the type out of existence into its underlying type.

# Related Work

`Atomic<T>` type exists in almost all CPU programming languages and is the proven way to express atomic operations over different
architectures that have different memory models. WGSL and Metal follows this trend to require atomic operations being expressed
this way. This proposal is to make Slang follow this trend and make `Atomic<T>` the recommened way to express atomic operation
going forward.

0 comments on commit 1560326

Please sign in to comment.