-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32k
gh-124370: Add "howto" for free-threaded Python #124371
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from 8 commits
5b4a8aa
0252cf5
df1489e
5658fa8
ae0f637
1554fb9
3b173e0
91ec1ca
6078cfd
e02ed00
526737e
f24bdb7
a3ad6b3
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,128 @@ | ||||||||||
.. _freethreading-python-howto: | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
********************************************** | ||||||||||
Python experimental support for free threading | ||||||||||
********************************************** | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Starting with the 3.13 release, CPython has experimental support for a build of Python | ||||||||||
called :term:`free threading` where the :term:`global interpreter lock` (GIL) is disabled. This document describes the implications of | ||||||||||
free threading for Python code. See :ref:`freethreading-extensions-howto` for | ||||||||||
information on how to write C extensions that support the free-threaded build. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I wonder if we could add a quick snapshot of the overall plan: if everything works out, eventually free threading will be the only build, etc. Also, maybe a statement about how most programmer won't need to be concerned with this, we're doing a lot to keep everyday Python programs behaving the same, etc. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I would perhaps add a note in the seealso block that refers to the PEP and adds 1 or 2 highlights:
|
||||||||||
.. seealso:: | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
:pep:`703` – Making the Global Interpreter Lock Optional in CPython for an | ||||||||||
overall description of free-threaded Python. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Installation | ||||||||||
============ | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Starting with Python 3.13, the official macOS and Windows installers | ||||||||||
willingc marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||||||||||
optionally support installing free-threaded Python binaries. The installers | ||||||||||
are available at https://www.python.org/downloads/. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
.. seealso:: | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
`Installing a Free-Threaded Python | ||||||||||
<https://py-free-threading.github.io/installing_cpython/>`_: | ||||||||||
A community-maintained installation guide for installing free-threaded | ||||||||||
Python. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Identifying free-threaded Python | ||||||||||
================================ | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
The free-threaded build of CPython can optionally run with the global | ||||||||||
interpreter lock enabled, such as when :envvar:`PYTHON_GIL` is set to ``1``, | ||||||||||
or automatically when importing an extension module that requires the GIL. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
The :func:`sys._is_gil_enabled` function will return ``False`` if the global | ||||||||||
interpreter lock is currently disabled. This is the recommended mechanism for | ||||||||||
decisions like whether to use multithreading or multiprocessing. | ||||||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Is it likely that people will write code that examines this variable and chooses between multithreading and multiprocessing? It seems unlikely to me, but maybe library authors will? When should it be used? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. "How do I distinguish between the free-threaded and GIL-enabled build?" is a fairly common question, although I don't think people make much use of it other than for quick debugging and sanity checks. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I would break this section into two sections:
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
The ``sysconfig.get_config_var("Py_GIL_DISABLED")`` configuration variable can | ||||||||||
be used to determine whether the build supports free threading. If the variable | ||||||||||
is set to ``1``, then the build supports free threading. This is the recommended | ||||||||||
mechanism for decisions related to the build configuration. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Thread safety | ||||||||||
============= | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
The free-threaded build of CPython aims to provide similar thread-safety | ||||||||||
behavior at the Python level to the default GIL-enabled build. Built-in | ||||||||||
types like :class:`dict`, :class:`list`, and :class:`set` use internal locks | ||||||||||
to protect against concurrent modifications in ways that behave similarly to | ||||||||||
the GIL. However, Python has not historically guaranteed specific behavior for | ||||||||||
concurrent modifications to these built-in types, so this should be treated | ||||||||||
as a description of the current implementation, not a guarantee of current or future | ||||||||||
behavior. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
.. note:: | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
It's recommended to use the :class:`threading.Lock` or other synchronization | ||||||||||
willingc marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||||||||||
primitives instead of relying on the internal locks of built-in types, when | ||||||||||
possible. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Known limitations | ||||||||||
================= | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
This section describes known limitations of the free-threaded CPython build. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Immortalization | ||||||||||
--------------- | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
The free-threaded build of the 3.13 release makes some objects :term:`immortal` | ||||||||||
in order to avoid reference count contention that would prevent efficient | ||||||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I've reworked this a bit. Would you please take another look at it? As you wrote, immortalization means reference counts are not modified and objects are not guaranteed not to be deallocated. I wanted to get across that:
|
||||||||||
multi-threaded scaling. This means that these objects are never deallocated. | ||||||||||
This is expected to be addressed in Python 3.14 with | ||||||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. "addressed" how? That makes it sound like immortal objects are a problem. Are they? |
||||||||||
`deferred reference counting <https://peps.python.org/pep-0703/#deferred-reference-counting>`_. | ||||||||||
ZeroIntensity marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
An object will be made immortal when a new thread is started for the first time after the main thread is running. | ||||||||||
The following objects are immortalized: | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
* :ref:`function <user-defined-funcs>` objects declared at the module level | ||||||||||
* :ref:`method <instance-methods>` descriptors | ||||||||||
* :ref:`code <code-objects>` objects | ||||||||||
* :term:`module` objects and their dictionaries | ||||||||||
* :ref:`classes <classes>` (type objects) | ||||||||||
Comment on lines
+109
to
+113
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It's probably worth noting somewhere in here that these objects (and immortalization itself) are implementation details, and very much subject to change. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
The immortalization of these objects happens the first time a thread is started | ||||||||||
after the main thread. | ||||||||||
ZeroIntensity marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. After reading about immortalization, I don't understand the implications for me as a Python programmer. Why do I care that they are now immortal? These all sound like things that would have never been deallocated anyway. Are there unusual circumstances that I should be considering? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Hopefully most people won't care, but some programs create these sorts of things in a loop. |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Additionally, numeric and string literals in the code as well as strings | ||||||||||
returned by :func:`sys.intern` are also immortalized. This behavior is | ||||||||||
expected to remain in the 3.14 free-threaded build. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Frame objects | ||||||||||
------------- | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
It is not safe to access :ref:`frame <frame-objects>` objects from other | ||||||||||
willingc marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||||||||||
threads and doing so may cause your program to crash . This means that | ||||||||||
:func:`sys._current_frames` is generally not safe to use in a free-threaded | ||||||||||
build. Functions like :func:`inspect.currentframe` and :func:`sys._getframe` | ||||||||||
are generally safe as long as the resulting frame object is not passed to | ||||||||||
another thread. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Iterators | ||||||||||
--------- | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Sharing the same iterator object between multiple threads is generally not | ||||||||||
safe and threads may see duplicate or missing elements when iterating or crash | ||||||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Is the possible crashing of the interpreter expected to be addressed in 3.14? As a consequence of iterators not being thread safe, some modules are not safe either (e g. |
||||||||||
the interpreter. | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Single-threaded performance | ||||||||||
--------------------------- | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
The free-threaded build has additional overhead when executing Python code | ||||||||||
compared to the default GIL-enabled build. In 3.13, this overhead is about | ||||||||||
40% on the `pyperformance <https://pyperformance.readthedocs.io/>`_ suite. | ||||||||||
willingc marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||||||||||
Programs that spend most of their time in C extensions or I/O will see | ||||||||||
less of an impact. This overhead is expected to be reduced in Python | ||||||||||
3.14. We are aiming for an overhead of 10% or less on the pyperformance | ||||||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We expect that the biggest source of improvement will be reenabling the specializing adaptive interpreter in 3.14. It's currently disabled in the 3.13 free-threaded build. Is that worth mentioning here? I don't expect any big performance impact for reference counting and garbage collection changes in 3.14 |
||||||||||
suite compared to the default GIL-enabled build. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We seem to switch between "free threading" and "free-threaded" kind of randomly. I can't decide if this is OK or if we should choose one and stick with it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's fine. We also say both "multithreaded" and "multithreading" depending on the context.