java atomics operations

Is correct to divide the following statements:

int v = ++j;

as:

1. read j value (atomic);
2. increment by 1 th开发者_如何学编程e value read (NON atomic possibly interference by other thread);
3. write the adding result to i (atomic);
4. write i into v (atomic)

Yes, int (or smaller datatypes) read/write/arithmetic operations are atomic. References (read/write) are also atomic, regardless of whether it's 32-bit or 64-bit.

However, operations on 64-bit long and double may not be atomic.

JLS 17.7 Non-atomic Treatment of double and long

Some implementations may find it convenient to divide a single write action on a 64-bit long or double value into two write actions on adjacent 32 bit values. For efficiency's sake, this behavior is implementation specific; Java virtual machines are free to perform writes to long and double values atomically or in two parts.

For the purposes of the Java programming language memory model, a single write to a non-volatile long or double value is treated as two separate writes: one to each 32-bit half. This can result in a situation where a thread sees the first 32 bits of a 64 bit value from one write, and the second 32 bits from another write. Writes and reads of volatile long and double values are always atomic. Writes to and reads of references are always atomic, regardless of whether they are implemented as 32 or 64 bit values.

VM implementors are encouraged to avoid splitting their 64-bit values where possible. Programmers are encouraged to declare shared 64-bit values as volatile or synchronize their programs correctly to avoid possible complications.

Note that neither pre- nor post- increment/decrement operators themselves are atomic, not even on int or byte: the read/write/arithmetic operations happens in distinctly separate steps.

See also

• Java Tutorials/Essentials/Concurrency/Atomic Variables

Yes, your assumption is correct. Incrementing an int results in three steps (thus it is not atomic), assigning it is another step. Here is the resulting bytecode:

..
istore_1
iinc    1, 1
iload_1
istore_2
..

Close. Step 2 is atomic. In this case j must be one of byte, char, short or int, and each of these can be loaded and stored atomically.

Once a value has been loaded into a hardware register, there should be no possibility that another thread can interfere with it. There's probably something in the JLS about the atomicity of primitive operations ... but I cannot spot it.

I would use AtomicInteger

AtomicInteger j; // do init

int v = j.incrementAndGet();

A quick view with JAD shows the following byte code for the instructions:

    int j = 0;
//    0    0:iconst_0
//    1    1:istore_1
    int v = ++j;
//    2    2:iinc            1  1
//    3    5:iload_1
//    4    6:istore_2