/* * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. * You may obtain a copy of the License at * * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 * * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and * limitations under the License. */ /** * This package aims to fill a gap in current JDK implementations in offering lock free (wait free where possible) * queues for inter-thread message passing with finer grained guarantees and an emphasis on performance.<br> * At the time of writing the only lock free queue available in the JDK is * {@link java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentLinkedQueue} which is an unbounded multi-producer, multi-consumer queue which * is further encumbered by the need to implement the full range of {@link java.util.Queue} methods. In this package we * offer a range of implementations: * <ol> * <li>Bounded/Unbounded SPSC queues - Serving the Single Producer Single Consumer use case. * <li>Bounded/Unbounded MPSC queues - The Multi Producer Single Consumer case also has a multi-lane implementation on * offer which trades the FIFO ordering(re-ordering is not limited) for reduced contention and increased throughput * under contention. * <li>Bounded SPMC/MPMC queues * </ol> * <p> * <br> * <b>Limited Queue methods support:</b><br> * The queues implement a subset of the {@link java.util.Queue} interface which is documented under the * {@link org.jctools.queues.MessagePassingQueue} interface. In particular {@link java.util.Queue#iterator()} is not * supported and dependent methods from {@link java.util.AbstractQueue} are also not supported such as: * <ol> * <li>{@link java.util.Queue#remove(Object)} * <li>{@link java.util.Queue#removeAll(java.util.Collection)} * <li>{@link java.util.Queue#removeIf(java.util.function.Predicate)} * <li>{@link java.util.Queue#contains(Object)} * <li>{@link java.util.Queue#containsAll(java.util.Collection)} * </ol> * <p> * <br> * <b>Memory layout controls and False Sharing:</b><br> * The classes in this package use what is considered at the moment the most reliable method of controlling class field * layout, namely inheritance. The method is described in this * <a href="http://psy-lob-saw.blogspot.com/2013/05/know-thy-java-object-memory-layout.html">post</a> which also covers * why other methods are currently suspect.<br> * Note that we attempt to tackle both active (write/write) and passive(read/write) false sharing case: * <ol> * <li>Hot counters (or write locations) are padded. * <li>Read-Only shared fields are padded. * <li>Array edges are padded. * </ol> * <p> * <br> * <b>Use of sun.misc.Unsafe:</b><br> * A choice is made in this library to utilize sun.misc.Unsafe for performance reasons. In this package we have two use * cases: * <ol> * <li>The queue counters in the queues are all inlined (i.e. are primitive fields of the queue classes). To allow * lazySet/CAS semantics to these fields we could use {@link java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicLongFieldUpdater} but * choose not to for performance reasons. On newer OpenJDKs where AFU is made more performant the difference is small. * <li>We use Unsafe to gain volatile/lazySet access to array elements. We could use * {@link java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicReferenceArray} but choose not to for performance reasons(extra reference * chase and redundant boundary checks). * </ol> * Both use cases should be made obsolete by VarHandles at some point. * <p> * <br> * <b>Avoiding redundant loads of fields:</b><br> * Because a volatile load will force any following field access to reload the field value an effort is made to cache * field values in local variables where possible and expose interfaces which allow the code to capitalize on such * caching. As a convention the local variable name will be the field name and will be final. * <p> * <br> * <b>Method naming conventions:</b><br> * The following convention is followed in method naming to highlight volatile/ordered/plain access to fields: * <ol> * <li>lpFoo/spFoo: these will be plain load or stores to the field. No memory ordering is needed or expected. * <li>soFoo: this is an ordered stored to the field (like * {@link java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicInteger#lazySet(int)}). Implies an ordering of stores (StoreStore barrier * before the store). * <li>lv/svFoo: these are volatile load/store. A store implies a StoreLoad barrier, a load implies LoadLoad barrier * before and LoadStore after. * <li>casFoo: compare and swap the field. StoreLoad if successful. See * {@link java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicInteger#compareAndSet(int, int)} * <li>xchgFoo: atomically get and set the field. Effectively a StoreLoad. See * {@link java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicInteger#getAndSet(int)} * <li>xaddFoo: atomically get and add to the field. Effectively a StoreLoad. See * {@link java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicInteger#getAndAdd(int)} * </ol> * It is generally expected that a volatile load signals the acquire of a field previously released by a non-plain * store. * * @author nitsanw */ package org.jctools.queues;