That doesn't really explain it though, IMO. IIUC, it's a sequence of instructions that either runs to completion atomically or doesn't. If it is interrupted by anything the kernel jumps you to the abort/retry vector you set with a guarantee that the last instruction in the sequence was not executed.
(Based on my reading of the LWN article rwmj posted).
Yes, the API contract isn't "don't interrupt me during this critical section" it's "if you have to interrupt me during this critical section, go to this recovery/restart code".
There is a time-slice extension feature in the works that's roughly "please let me finish this critical section before you interrupt me". But a hard guarantee that userspace code won't be interrupted is probably untenable in a preemptive multitasking system.
Something not completely dissimilar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCLSRing then?
> it's a sequence of instructions that either runs to completion atomically or doesn't
The way I read it, it either runs to completion in one go, or gets restarted from the beginning. This means the sequence as a whole isn't executed atomically, as the already-executed instructions during an interrupt aren't rolled back.
It can be used to build atomic actions, but it is up to the developer to create a sequence of instructions where the very last instruction "commits" the entire operation, with the side-effects of partial execution being harmless.