One of the examples of misuse of std::memory_order::relaxed in C++ Standard:
std::atomic<int> x{0};
int a[] = {1,2};
std::for_each(std::execution::par, std::begin(a), std::end(a), [&](int) {
x.fetch_add(1, std::memory_order::relaxed);
// spin wait for another iteration to change the value of x
while (x.load(std::memory_order::relaxed) == 1) { } // incorrect: assumes execution order
});
And then it says,
The above example depends on the order of execution of the iterations, and will not terminate if both iterations are executed sequentially on the same thread of execution.
Questions:
The comment says, "incorrect: assumes execution order". What's the "assumed execution order"? I miss it.
What does the "iterations" refer to in "The above example depends on the order of execution of the iterations"? Does it mean the iteration in while loop? Or does it refer to the iteration of
std::for_each?If the iterations of
std::for_eachare executed in parallel by different threads, isn't it still true that one of the iterations/threads won't exit? Becausex.fetch_add(1, std::memory_order::relaxed)is atomic and so one thread will makex1 and another will makex2 and it is impossible to have x == 1 for both thread. No?
It assumes that the body of the lambda gets executed by multiple threads rather than one. The standard rather says that it may execute in parallel.
It probably refers to the execution of the lambda by another thread. But the standard doesn't guarantee that there is another thread. See execution_policy_tag_t: