Better explain lock-free and atomicity

This commit is contained in:
Lysandros Nikolaou 2025-12-17 13:53:18 +01:00
parent 2b9e711b24
commit 688b25a2b0
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: 43E92D11D08F5F29

View file

@ -1438,59 +1438,88 @@ application).
.. admonition:: Thread safety
Most individual operations on :class:`list` instances are atomic:
Reading a single element from a :class:`list` is
:term:`atomic <atomic operation>`:
.. code-block::
:class: good
:class: green
# The following operations are atomic
lst1 + lst2 # atomic concatenation of two lists
x * lst # atomic repeat of lst x times
item = lst[i] # atomically retrieves item at index i
lst[i] = value # atomically replaces item at index i
lst *= x # atomically extend the list x times
lst[i] # list.__getitem__
# Calls to the following list methods are atomic
lst.clear()
lst.copy()
lst.append(item)
lst.insert(idx, item)
lst.pop(idx)
lst.remove(item)
lst.reverse()
lst.sort()
The following operations/methods are not fully atomic:
The following methods traverse the list and use :term:`atomic <atomic operation>`
reads of each item to perform their function. That means that they may
return results affected by concurrent modifications:
.. code-block::
:class: maybe
item in lst
lst.index(item)
lst.count(item)
item in lst
lst.extend(iterable)
lst += iterable
All of the above methods/operations are also lock-free. They do not block
concurrent modifications. Other operations that hold a lock will not block
these from observing intermediate states.
All other operations from here on block using the per-object lock.
lst[i:j] = iterable
Writing a single item via ``lst[i] = x`` is safe to call from multiple
threads and will not corrupt the list.
The :meth:`~list.index` and :meth:`~list.count` methods, and the ``in``
operator, iterate the list without holding a lock. They are safe to call
concurrently but may return results affected by concurrent modifications.
The following operations return new objects and appear
:term:`atomic <atomic operations>` to other threads:
:meth:`~list.extend` is safe to call from multiple threads. However, the
operation is fully atomic only when the iterable that's passed to ``extend``
is a :class:`list`, a :class:`tuple`, a :class:`set`, a :class:`frozenset`,
a :class:`dict` or a :ref:`dictionary view object <dict-views>` (but not
their subclasses). Otherwise, an iterator is created which can be
concurrently modified by another thread. The same applies to inplace
concatenation of list with other iterables when using ``lst += iterable``.
.. code-block::
:class: good
lst1 + lst2 # concatenates two lists into a new list
x * lst # repeats lst x times into a new list
lst.copy() # returns a shallow copy of the list
Methods that only operate on a single elements with no shifting required are
:term:`atomic <atomic operations>`:
.. code-block::
:class: good
lst.append(x) # append to the end of the list, no shifting required
lst.pop() # pop element from the end of the list, no shifting required
The :meth:`~list.clear` method is also :term:`atomic <atomic operations>`.
Other threads cannot observe elements being removed.
The :meth:`~list.sort` method is not :term:`atomic <atomic operation>`.
Other threads cannot observe intermediate states during sorting, but the
list appears empty for the duration of the sort.
The following operations may allow lock-free operations to observe
intermediate states since they modify multiple elements in place:
.. code-block::
:class: maybe
lst.insert(idx, item) # shifts elements
lst.pop(idx) # idx not at the end of the list, shifts elements
lst *= x # copies elements in place
The :meth:`~list.remove` method may allow concurrent modifications since
element comparison may execute arbitrary Python code (via
:meth:`~object.__eq__`).
:meth:`~list.extend` is safe to call from multiple threads. However, its
guarantees depend on the iterable passed to it. If it is a :class:`list`, a
:class:`tuple`, a :class:`set`, a :class:`frozenset`, a :class:`dict` or a
:ref:`dictionary view object <dict-views>` (but not their subclasses), the
``extend`` operation is safe from concurrent modifications to the iterable.
Otherwise, an iterator is created which can be concurrently modified by
another thread. The same applies to inplace concatenation of a list with
other iterables when using ``lst += iterable``.
Similarly, assigning to a list slice with ``lst[i:j] = iterable`` is safe
to call from multiple threads, but ``iterable`` is only locked when it is
also a :class:`list` (but not its subclasses).
Operations that involve multiple accesses, as well as iteration, are not
Operations that involve multiple accesses, as well as iteration, are never
atomic. For example:
.. code-block::