Ordering::Relaxed guarantees atomicity (but not coherence). On 32-bit or 64-bit platforms, a (aligned) 32-bit read or write will always be atomic anyway.
An assembly-level read or write will always be atomic anyway, and in fact a relaxed atomic read/write typically compiles down to the exact same assembly as a normal read/write. However, there are compiler optimizations that can break atomicity, such as splitting accesses into multiple parts; using (relaxed) atomics instructs the compiler not to perform those optimizations.
What do you mean by coherence? If it is the property that all updates to a single memory location are seen in a consistent order by all threads then Relaxed guarantees that.
it doesn't. From cppreference (whose model Rust roughly follows): "Relaxed operation: there are no synchronization or ordering constraints imposed on other reads or writes, only this operation's atomicity is guaranteed"
Yes, a consistent ordering exists but that ordering isn’t necessarily what you think or want it to be. The consistency is present based off the order the reads and writes were executed in; you’ll never read back a value that wasn’t at some point stored there. Which can happen with non-atomic reads/writes, where you’ll read part of one write and part of the next. Reads can still be reordered before writes, as no memory barriers are issued.
Well that doesn't contradict anything that I have said :) My question remains - what do you mean by coherence? I argue that it is precisely the property that there is a consistent order of operations a single memory memory location so you can't say that Relaxed operations don't satisfy coherence.
You are correct. IIRC Coherency is the only property of relaxed atomic operations, as opposed of plain load/stores where concurrent modification and access is just UB.
