Rename `std:🧵:available_conccurrency` to `std:🧵:available_parallelism`
_Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/74479_
This PR renames `std:🧵:available_conccurrency` to `std:🧵:available_parallelism`.
## Rationale
The API was initially named `std:🧵:hardware_concurrency`, mirroring the [C++ API of the same name](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/thread/thread/hardware_concurrency). We eventually decided to omit any reference to the word "hardware" after [this comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74480#issuecomment-662045841). And so we ended up with `available_concurrency` instead.
---
For a talk I was preparing this week I was reading through ["Understanding and expressing scalable concurrency" (A. Turon, 2013)](http://aturon.github.io/academic/turon-thesis.pdf), and the following passage stood out to me (emphasis mine):
> __Concurrency is a system-structuring mechanism.__ An interactive system that deals with disparate asynchronous events is naturally structured by division into concurrent threads with disparate responsibilities. Doing so creates a better fit between problem and solution, and can also decrease the average latency of the system by preventing long-running computations from obstructing quicker ones.
> __Parallelism is a resource.__ A given machine provides a certain capacity for parallelism, i.e., a bound on the number of computations it can perform simultaneously. The goal is to maximize throughput by intelligently using this resource. For interactive systems, parallelism can decrease latency as well.
_Chapter 2.1: Concurrency is not Parallelism. Page 30._
---
_"Concurrency is a system-structuring mechanism. Parallelism is a resource."_ — It feels like this accurately captures the way we should be thinking about these APIs. What this API returns is not "the amount of concurrency available to the program" which is a property of the program, and thus even with just a single thread is effectively unbounded. But instead it returns "the amount of _parallelism_ available to the program", which is a resource hard-constrained by the machine's capacity (and can be further restricted by e.g. operating systems).
That's why I'd like to propose we rename this API from `available_concurrency` to `available_parallelism`. This still meets the criteria we previously established of not attempting to define what exactly we mean by "hardware", "threads", and other such words. Instead we only talk about "concurrency" as an abstract resource available to our program.
r? `@joshtriplett`
Previously the thread name would first be heap allocated and then
re-allocated to add a nul terminator. Now it will be heap allocated only
once with nul terminator added form the start.
- also clarifies how thread.join and detaching of threads works
- the previous prose implied that there is a relationship between a
spawning thread and the thread being spawned, and that "child" threads
couldn't outlive their parents unless detached, which is incorrect.
The old documentation suggested the use of yield_now for repeated
polling instead of discouraging it; it also made the false claim that
channels are implementing using yield_now. (They are not, except for
a corner case).
This commit adds a variant of the `thread_local!` macro as a new
`thread_local_const_init!` macro which requires that the initialization
expression is constant (e.g. could be stuck into a `const` if so
desired). This form of thread local allows for a more efficient
implementation of `LocalKey::with` both if the value has a destructor
and if it doesn't. If the value doesn't have a destructor then `with`
should desugar to exactly as-if you use `#[thread_local]` given
sufficient inlining.
The purpose of this new form of thread locals is to precisely be
equivalent to `#[thread_local]` on platforms where possible for values
which fit the bill (those without destructors). This should help close
the gap in performance between `thread_local!`, which is safe, relative
to `#[thread_local]`, which is not easy to use in a portable fashion.
The existing documentation does not spell out whether `ThreadId`s are unique
during the lifetime of a thread or of a process. I had to examine the source
code to realise (pleasingly!) that they're unique for the lifetime of a process.
That seems worth documenting clearly, as it's a strong guarantee.
Examining the way `ThreadId`s are created also made me realise that the `as_u64`
method on `ThreadId` could be a trap for the unwary on those platforms where the
platform's notion of a thread identifier is also a 64 bit integer (particularly
if they happen to use a similar identifier scheme to `ThreadId`). I therefore
think it's worth being even clearer that there's no relationship between the
two.
Split sys_common::Mutex in StaticMutex and MovableMutex.
The (unsafe) `Mutex` from `sys_common` had a rather complicated interface. You were supposed to call `init()` manually, unless you could guarantee it was neither moved nor used reentrantly.
Calling `destroy()` was also optional, although it was unclear if 1) resources might be leaked or not, and 2) if `destroy()` should only be called when `init()` was called.
This allowed for a number of interesting (confusing?) different ways to use this `Mutex`, all captured in a single type.
In practice, this type was only ever used in two ways:
1. As a static variable. In this case, neither `init()` nor `destroy()` are called. The variable is never moved, and it is never used reentrantly. It is only ever locked using the `LockGuard`, never with `raw_lock`.
2. As a `Box`ed variable. In this case, both `init()` and `destroy()` are called, it will be moved and possibly used reentrantly.
No other combinations are used anywhere in `std`.
This change simplifies things by splitting this `Mutex` type into two types matching the two use cases: `StaticMutex` and `MovableMutex`.
The interface of both new types is now both safer and simpler. The first one does not call nor expose `init`/`destroy`, and the second one calls those automatically in its `new()` and `Drop` functions. Also, the locking functions of `MovableMutex` are no longer unsafe.
---
This will also make it easier to conditionally box mutexes later, by moving that decision into sys/sys_common. Some of the mutex implementations (at least those of Wasm and 'sys/unsupported') are safe to move, so wouldn't need a box. ~~(But that's blocked on #76932 for now.)~~ (See #77380.)
The (unsafe) Mutex from sys_common had a rather complicated interface.
You were supposed to call init() manually, unless you could guarantee it
was neither moved nor used reentrantly.
Calling `destroy()` was also optional, although it was unclear if 1)
resources might be leaked or not, and 2) if destroy() should only be
called when `init()` was called.
This allowed for a number of interesting (confusing?) different ways to
use this Mutex, all captured in a single type.
In practice, this type was only ever used in two ways:
1. As a static variable. In this case, neither init() nor destroy() are
called. The variable is never moved, and it is never used
reentrantly. It is only ever locked using the LockGuard, never with
raw_lock.
2. As a Boxed variable. In this case, both init() and destroy() are
called, it will be moved and possibly used reentrantly.
No other combinations are used anywhere in `std`.
This change simplifies things by splitting this Mutex type into
two types matching the two use cases: StaticMutex and MovableMutex.
The interface of both new types is now both safer and simpler. The first
one does not call nor expose init/destroy, and the second one calls
those automatically in its new() and Drop functions. Also, the locking
functions of MovableMutex are no longer unsafe.
