react-native-windows 0.84.0-preview.9 → 0.84.1

package/external/folly/folly/synchronization/DistributedMutex-inl.h

@@ -0,0 +1,1744 @@
+/*
+ * Copyright (c) Meta Platforms, Inc. and affiliates.
+ *
+ * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
+ * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+ * You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ *     http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+#include <array>
+#include <atomic>
+#include <cstdint>
+#include <limits>
+#include <new>
+#include <stdexcept>
+#include <thread>
+#include <utility>
+
+#include <glog/logging.h>
+
+#include <folly/ConstexprMath.h>
+#include <folly/Likely.h>
+#include <folly/Portability.h>
+#include <folly/ScopeGuard.h>
+#include <folly/Utility.h>
+#include <folly/chrono/Hardware.h>
+#include <folly/detail/Futex.h>
+#include <folly/functional/Invoke.h>
+#include <folly/lang/Align.h>
+#include <folly/lang/Bits.h>
+#include <folly/lang/Exception.h>
+#include <folly/portability/Asm.h>
+#include <folly/synchronization/AtomicNotification.h>
+#include <folly/synchronization/AtomicUtil.h>
+#include <folly/synchronization/Lock.h>
+#include <folly/synchronization/detail/InlineFunctionRef.h>
+#include <folly/synchronization/detail/Sleeper.h>
+
+namespace folly {
+namespace detail {
+namespace distributed_mutex {
+// kUnlocked is used to show unlocked state
+//
+// When locking threads encounter kUnlocked in the underlying storage, they
+// can just acquire the lock without any further effort
+constexpr auto kUnlocked = std::uintptr_t{0b0};
+// kLocked is used to show that the mutex is currently locked, and future
+// attempts to lock the mutex should enqueue on the central storage
+//
+// Locking threads find this on central storage only when there is a
+// contention chain that is undergoing wakeups, in every other case, a locker
+// will either find kUnlocked or an arbitrary address with the kLocked bit set
+constexpr auto kLocked = std::uintptr_t{0b1};
+// kTimedWaiter is set when there is at least one timed waiter on the mutex
+//
+// Timed waiters do not follow the sleeping strategy employed by regular,
+// non-timed threads.  They sleep on the central mutex atomic through an
+// extended futex() interface that allows sleeping with the same semantics for
+// non-standard integer widths
+//
+// When a regular non-timed thread unlocks or enqueues on the mutex, and sees
+// a timed waiter, it takes ownership of all the timed waiters.  The thread
+// that has taken ownership of the timed waiter releases the timed waiters
+// when it gets a chance at the critical section.  At which point it issues a
+// wakeup to single timed waiter, timed waiters always issue wake() calls to
+// other timed waiters
+constexpr auto kTimedWaiter = std::uintptr_t{0b10};
+
+// kUninitialized means that the thread has just enqueued, and has not yet
+// gotten to initializing itself with the address of its successor
+//
+// this becomes significant for threads that are trying to wake up the
+// uninitialized thread, if they see that the thread is not yet initialized,
+// they can do nothing but spin, and wait for the thread to get initialized
+//
+// This also plays a role in the functioning of flat combining as implemented
+// in DistributedMutex.  When a thread owning the lock goes through the
+// contention chain to either unlock the mutex or combine critical sections
+// from the other end.  The presence of kUninitialized means that the
+// combining thread is not able to make progress after this point.  So we
+// transfer the lock.
+constexpr auto kUninitialized = std::uint32_t{0b0};
+// kWaiting will be set in the waiter's futex structs while they are spinning
+// while waiting for the mutex
+constexpr auto kWaiting = std::uint32_t{0b1};
+// kWake will be set by threads that are waking up waiters that have enqueued
+constexpr auto kWake = std::uint32_t{0b10};
+// kSkipped will be set by a waker when they see that a waiter has been
+// preempted away by the kernel, in this case the thread that got skipped will
+// have to wake up and put itself back on the queue
+constexpr auto kSkipped = std::uint32_t{0b11};
+// kAboutToWait will be set by a waiter that enqueues itself with the purpose
+// of waiting on a futex
+constexpr auto kAboutToWait = std::uint32_t{0b100};
+// kSleeping will be set by a waiter right before enqueueing on a futex.  When
+// a thread wants to wake up a waiter that has enqueued on a futex, it should
+// set the futex to contain kWake
+//
+// a thread that is unlocking and wants to skip over a sleeping thread also
+// calls futex_.exchange(kSleeping) on the sleeping thread's futex word.  It
+// does this to 1. detect whether the sleeping thread had actually gone to
+// sleeping on the futex word so it can skip it, and 2. to synchronize with
+// other non atomic writes in the sleeping thread's context (such as the write
+// to track the next waiting thread).
+//
+// We reuse kSleeping instead of say using another constant kEarlyDelivery to
+// avoid situations where a thread has to enter kernel mode due to calling
+// futexWait() twice because of the presence of a waking thread.  This
+// situation can arise when an unlocking thread goes to skip over a sleeping
+// thread, sees that the thread has slept and move on, but the sleeping thread
+// had not yet entered futex().  This interleaving causes the thread calling
+// futex() to return spuriously, as the futex word is not what it should be
+constexpr auto kSleeping = std::uint32_t{0b101};
+// kCombined is set by the lock holder to let the waiter thread know that its
+// combine request was successfully completed by the lock holder.  A
+// successful combine means that the thread requesting the combine operation
+// does not need to unlock the mutex; in fact, doing so would be an error.
+constexpr auto kCombined = std::uint32_t{0b111};
+// kCombineUninitialized is like kUninitialized but is set by a thread when it
+// enqueues in hopes of getting its critical section combined with the lock
+// holder
+constexpr auto kCombineUninitialized = std::uint32_t{0b1000};
+// kCombineWaiting is set by a thread when it is ready to have its combine
+// record fulfilled by the lock holder.  In particular, this signals to the
+// lock holder that the thread has set its next_ pointer in the contention
+// chain
+constexpr auto kCombineWaiting = std::uint32_t{0b1001};
+// kExceptionOccurred is set on the waiter futex when the remote task throws
+// an exception.  It is the caller's responsibility to retrieve the exception
+// and rethrow it in their own context.  Note that when the caller uses a
+// noexcept function as their critical section, they can avoid checking for
+// this value
+//
+// This allows us to avoid all cost of exceptions in the memory layout of the
+// fast path (no errors) as exceptions are stored as an std::exception_ptr in
+// the same union that stores the return value of the critical section.  We
+// also avoid all CPU overhead because the combiner uses a try-catch block
+// without any additional branching to handle exceptions
+constexpr auto kExceptionOccurred = std::uint32_t{0b1010};
+
+// Alias for processor's time-stamp counter value to help distinguish it from
+// other integers
+using CpuTicks = std::uint64_t;
+// The number of spins that we are allowed to do before we resort to marking a
+// thread as having slept
+//
+// This is just a magic number from benchmarks
+constexpr auto kScheduledAwaySpinThreshold = CpuTicks{200};
+// The maximum time to spin before a thread starts yielding its processor
+// in hopes of getting skipped
+constexpr auto kMaxSpinTime = CpuTicks{40000};
+// The maximum number of contention chains we can resolve with flat combining.
+// After this number of contention chains, the mutex falls back to regular
+// two-phased mutual exclusion to ensure that we don't starve the combiner
+// thread
+constexpr auto kMaxCombineIterations = 2;
+
+/**
+ * Write only data that is available to the thread that is waking up another.
+ * Only the waking thread is allowed to write to this, the thread to be woken
+ * is allowed to read from this after a wakeup has been issued
+ */
+template <template <typename> class Atomic>
+class WakerMetadata {
+ public:
+  // This is the thread that initiated wakeups for the contention chain.
+  // There can only ever be one thread that initiates the wakeup for a
+  // chain in the spin only version of this mutex.  When a thread that just
+  // woke up sees this as the next thread to wake up, it knows that it is the
+  // terminal node in the contention chain.  This means that it was the one
+  // that took off the thread that had acquired the mutex off the centralized
+  // state.  Therefore, the current thread is the last in its contention
+  // chain.  It will fall back to centralized storage to pick up the next
+  // waiter or release the mutex
+  //
+  // When we move to a full sleeping implementation, this might need to change
+  // to a small_vector<> to account for failed wakeups, or we can put threads
+  // to sleep on the central futex, which is an easier implementation
+  // strategy.  Although, since this is allocated on the stack, we can set a
+  // prohitively large threshold to avoid heap allocations, this strategy
+  // however, might cause increased cache misses on wakeup signalling
+  std::uintptr_t waker_{0};
+  // the list of threads that the waker had previously seen to be sleeping on
+  // a futex(),
+  //
+  // this is given to the current thread as a means to pass on
+  // information.  When the current thread goes to unlock the mutex and does
+  // not see contention, it should go and wake up the head of this list.  If
+  // the current thread sees a contention chain on the mutex, it should pass
+  // on this list to the next thread that gets woken up
+  std::uintptr_t waiters_{0};
+  // The futex that this waiter will sleep on
+  //
+  // how can we reuse futex_ from above for futex management?
+  Futex<Atomic> sleeper_{kUninitialized};
+};
+
+/**
+ * Type of the type-erased callable that is used for combining from the lock
+ * holder's end.  This has 48 bytes of inline storage that can be used to
+ * minimize cache misses when combining
+ */
+using CombineFunction = detail::InlineFunctionRef<void(), 48>;
+
+/**
+ * Waiter encapsulates the state required for waiting on the mutex, this
+ * contains potentially heavy state and is intended to be allocated on the
+ * stack as part of a lock() function call
+ *
+ * To ensure that synchronization does not cause unintended side effects on
+ * the rest of the thread stack (eg. metadata in lockImplementation(), or any
+ * other data in the user's thread), we aggresively pad this struct and use
+ * custom alignment internally to ensure that the relevant data fits within a
+ * single cacheline.  The added alignment here also gives us some room to
+ * wiggle in the bottom few bits of the mutex, where we store extra metadata
+ */
+template <template <typename> class Atomic>
+class Waiter {
+ public:
+  Waiter() {}
+  Waiter(Waiter&&) = delete;
+  Waiter(const Waiter&) = delete;
+  Waiter& operator=(Waiter&&) = delete;
+  Waiter& operator=(const Waiter&) = delete;
+
+  void initialize(std::uint64_t futex, CombineFunction task) {
+    // we only initialize the function if we were actually given a non-null
+    // task, otherwise
+    if (task) {
+      DCHECK_EQ(futex, kCombineUninitialized);
+      new (&function_) CombineFunction{task};
+    } else {
+      DCHECK((futex == kUninitialized) || (futex == kAboutToWait));
+      new (&metadata_) WakerMetadata<Atomic>{};
+    }
+
+    // this pedantic store is needed to ensure that the waking thread
+    // synchronizes with the state in the waiter struct when it loads the
+    // value of the futex word
+    //
+    // on x86, this gets optimized away to just a regular store, it might be
+    // needed on platforms where explicit acquire-release barriers are
+    // required for synchronization
+    //
+    // note that we release here at the end of the constructor because
+    // construction is complete here, any thread that acquires this release
+    // will see a well constructed wait node
+    futex_.store(futex, std::memory_order_release);
+  }
+
+  std::array<std::uint8_t, hardware_destructive_interference_size> padding1;
+  // the atomic that this thread will spin on while waiting for the mutex to
+  // be unlocked
+  alignas(hardware_destructive_interference_size) Atomic<std::uint64_t> futex_{
+      kUninitialized};
+  // The successor of this node.  This will be the thread that had its address
+  // on the mutex previously
+  //
+  // We can do without making this atomic since the remote thread synchronizes
+  // on the futex variable above.  If this were not atomic, the remote thread
+  // would only be allowed to read from it after the waiter has moved into the
+  // waiting state to avoid risk of a load racing with a write.  However, it
+  // helps to make this atomic because we can use an unconditional load and make
+  // full use of the load buffer to coalesce both reads into a single clock
+  // cycle after the line arrives in the combiner core.  This is a heavily
+  // contended line, so an RFO from the enqueueing thread is highly likely and
+  // has the potential to cause an immediate invalidation; blocking the combiner
+  // thread from making progress until the line is pulled back to read this
+  // value
+  //
+  // Further, making this atomic prevents the compiler from making an incorrect
+  // optimization where it does not load the value as written in the code, but
+  // rather dereferences it through a pointer whenever needed (since the value
+  // of the pointer to this is readily available on the stack).  Doing this
+  // causes multiple invalidation requests from the enqueueing thread, blocking
+  // remote progress
+  //
+  // Note that we use relaxed loads and stores, so this should not have any
+  // additional overhead compared to a regular load on most architectures
+  std::atomic<std::uintptr_t> next_{0};
+  // We use an anonymous union for the combined critical section request and
+  // the metadata that will be filled in from the leader's end.  Only one is
+  // active at a time - if a leader decides to combine the requested critical
+  // section into its execution, it will not touch the metadata field.  If a
+  // leader decides to migrate the lock to the waiter, it will not touch the
+  // function
+  //
+  // this allows us to transfer more state when combining a critical section
+  // and reduce the cache misses originating from executing an arbitrary
+  // lambda
+  //
+  // note that this is an anonymous union, not an unnamed union, the members
+  // leak into the surrounding scope
+  union {
+    // metadata for the waker
+    WakerMetadata<Atomic> metadata_;
+    // The critical section that can potentially be combined into the critical
+    // section of the locking thread
+    //
+    // This is kept as a FunctionRef because the original function is preserved
+    // until the lock_combine() function returns.  A consequence of using
+    // FunctionRef here is that we don't need to do any allocations and can
+    // allow users to capture unbounded state into the critical section.  Flat
+    // combining means that the user does not have access to the thread
+    // executing the critical section, so assumptions about thread local
+    // references can be invalidated.  Being able to capture arbitrary state
+    // allows the user to do thread local accesses right before the critical
+    // section and pass them as state to the callable being referenced here
+    CombineFunction function_;
+    // The user is allowed to use a combined critical section that returns a
+    // value.  This buffer is used to implement the value transfer to the
+    // waiting thread.  We reuse the same union because this helps us combine
+    // one synchronization operation with a material value transfer.
+    //
+    // The waker thread needs to synchronize on this cacheline to issue a
+    // wakeup to the waiter, meaning that the entire line needs to be pulled
+    // into the remote core in exclusive mode.  So we reuse the coherence
+    // operation to transfer the return value in addition to the
+    // synchronization signal.  In the case that the user's data item is
+    // small, the data is transferred all inline as part of the same line,
+    // which pretty much arrives into the CPU cache in the same clock cycle or
+    // two after a read-for-ownership request.  This gives us a high chance of
+    // coalescing the entire transitive store buffer together into one cache
+    // coherence operation from the waker's end.  This allows us to make use
+    // of the CPU bus bandwidth which would have otherwise gone to waste.
+    // Benchmarks prove this theory under a wide range of contention, value
+    // sizes, NUMA interactions and processor models
+    //
+    // The current version of the Intel optimization manual confirms this
+    // theory somewhat as well in section 2.3.5.1 (Load and Store Operation
+    // Overview)
+    //
+    //    When an instruction writes data to a memory location [...], the
+    //    processor ensures that it has the line containing this memory location
+    //    is in its L1d cache [...]. If the cache line is not there, it fetches
+    //    from the next levels using a RFO request [...] RFO and storing the
+    //    data happens after instruction retirement.  Therefore, the store
+    //    latency usually does not affect the store instruction itself
+    //
+    // This gives the user the ability to input up to 48 bytes into the
+    // combined critical section through an InlineFunctionRef and output 48
+    // bytes from it basically without any cost.  The type of the entity
+    // stored in the buffer has to be matched by the type erased callable that
+    // the caller has used.  At this point, the caller is still in the
+    // template instantiation leading to the combine request, so it has
+    // knowledge of the return type and can apply the appropriate
+    // reinterpret_cast and launder operation to safely retrieve the data from
+    // this buffer
+    folly::aligned_storage_t<48, 8> storage_;
+  };
+  std::array<std::uint8_t, hardware_destructive_interference_size> padding2;
+};
+
+/**
+ * A template that helps us differentiate between the different ways to return
+ * a value from a combined critical section.  A return value of type void
+ * cannot be stored anywhere, so we use specializations and pick the right one
+ * switched through std::conditional_t
+ *
+ * This is then used by CoalescedTask and its family of functions to implement
+ * efficient return value transfers to the waiting threads
+ */
+template <typename Func>
+class RequestWithReturn {
+ public:
+  using F = Func;
+  using ReturnType = folly::invoke_result_t<const Func&>;
+  explicit RequestWithReturn(Func func) : func_{std::move(func)} {}
+
+  /**
+   * We need to define the destructor here because C++ requires (with good
+   * reason) that a union with non-default destructor be explicitly destroyed
+   * from the surrounding class, as neither the runtime nor compiler have the
+   * knowledge of what to do with a union at the time of destruction
+   *
+   * Each request that has a valid return value set will have the value
+   * retrieved from the get() method, where the value is destroyed.  So we
+   * don't need to destroy it here
+   */
+  ~RequestWithReturn() {}
+
+  /**
+   * This method can be used to return a value from the request.  This returns
+   * the underlying value because return type of the function we were
+   * instantiated with is not void
+   */
+  ReturnType get() && {
+    // when the return value has been processed, we destroy the value
+    // contained in this request.  Using a scope_exit means that we don't have
+    // to worry about storing the value somewhere and causing potentially an
+    // extra move
+    //
+    // note that the invariant here is that this function is only called if the
+    // requesting thread had it's critical section combined, and the value_
+    // member constructed through detach()
+    SCOPE_EXIT {
+      value_.~ReturnType();
+    };
+    return std::move(value_);
+  }
+
+  // this contains a copy of the function the waiter had requested to be
+  // executed as a combined critical section
+  Func func_;
+  // this stores the return value used in the request, we use a union here to
+  // avoid laundering and allow return types that are not default
+  // constructible to be propagated through the execution of the critical
+  // section
+  //
+  // note that this is an anonymous union, the member leaks into the
+  // surrounding scope as a member variable
+  union {
+    ReturnType value_;
+  };
+};
+
+template <typename Func>
+class RequestWithoutReturn {
+ public:
+  using F = Func;
+  using ReturnType = void;
+  explicit RequestWithoutReturn(Func func) : func_{std::move(func)} {}
+
+  /**
+   * In this version of the request class, get() returns nothing as there is
+   * no stored value
+   */
+  void get() && {}
+
+  // this contains a copy of the function the waiter had requested to be
+  // executed as a combined critical section
+  Func func_;
+};
+
+// we need to use std::integral_constant::value here as opposed to
+// std::integral_constant::operator T() because MSVC errors out with the
+// implicit conversion
+template <typename Func>
+using Request = std::conditional_t<
+    std::is_void<folly::invoke_result_t<const Func&>>::value,
+    RequestWithoutReturn<Func>,
+    RequestWithReturn<Func>>;
+
+/**
+ * A template that helps us to transform a callable returning a value to one
+ * that returns void so it can be type erased and passed on to the waker.  If
+ * the return value is small enough, it gets coalesced into the wait struct
+ * for optimal data transfer.  When it's not small enough to fit in the waiter
+ * storage buffer, we place it on it's own cacheline with isolation to prevent
+ * false-sharing with the on-stack metadata of the waiter thread
+ *
+ * This helps a combined critical section feel more normal in the case where
+ * the user wants to return a value, for example
+ *
+ *    auto value = mutex_.lock_combine([&]() {
+ *      return data_.value();
+ *    });
+ *
+ * Without this, the user would typically create a dummy object that they
+ * would then assign to from within the lambda.  With return value chaining,
+ * this pattern feels more natural
+ *
+ * Note that it is important to copy the entire callble into this class.
+ * Storing something like a reference instead is not desirable because it does
+ * not allow InlineFunctionRef to use inline storage to represent the user's
+ * callable without extra indirections
+ *
+ * We use std::conditional_t and switch to the right type of task with the
+ * CoalescedTask type alias
+ */
+template <typename Func, typename Waiter>
+class TaskWithCoalesce {
+ public:
+  using ReturnType = folly::invoke_result_t<const Func&>;
+  using StorageType = folly::Unit;
+  explicit TaskWithCoalesce(Func func, Waiter& waiter)
+      : func_{std::move(func)}, waiter_{waiter} {}
+
+  void operator()() const {
+    auto value = func_();
+    new (&waiter_.storage_) ReturnType{std::move(value)};
+  }
+
+ private:
+  Func func_;
+  Waiter& waiter_;
+
+  static_assert(!std::is_void<ReturnType>{}, "");
+  static_assert(alignof(decltype(waiter_.storage_)) >= alignof(ReturnType), "");
+  static_assert(sizeof(decltype(waiter_.storage_)) >= sizeof(ReturnType), "");
+};
+
+template <typename Func, typename Waiter>
+class TaskWithoutCoalesce {
+ public:
+  using ReturnType = void;
+  using StorageType = folly::Unit;
+  explicit TaskWithoutCoalesce(Func func, Waiter&) : func_{std::move(func)} {}
+
+  void operator()() const { func_(); }
+
+ private:
+  Func func_;
+};
+
+template <typename Func, typename Waiter>
+class TaskWithBigReturnValue {
+ public:
+  // Using storage that is aligned on the cacheline boundary helps us avoid a
+  // situation where the data ends up being allocated on two separate
+  // cachelines.  This would require the remote thread to pull in both lines
+  // to issue a write.
+  //
+  // We also isolate the storage by appending some padding to the end to
+  // ensure we avoid false-sharing with the metadata used while the waiter
+  // waits
+  using ReturnType = folly::invoke_result_t<const Func&>;
+  static const auto kReturnValueAlignment = folly::constexpr_max(
+      alignof(ReturnType), folly::hardware_destructive_interference_size);
+  using StorageType =
+      folly::aligned_storage_t<sizeof(ReturnType), kReturnValueAlignment>;
+
+  explicit TaskWithBigReturnValue(Func func, Waiter&)
+      : func_{std::move(func)} {}
+
+  void operator()() const {
+    DCHECK(storage_);
+    auto value = func_();
+    new (storage_) ReturnType{std::move(value)};
+  }
+
+  void attach(StorageType* storage) {
+    DCHECK(!storage_);
+    storage_ = storage;
+  }
+
+ private:
+  Func func_;
+  StorageType* storage_{nullptr};
+
+  static_assert(!std::is_void<ReturnType>{}, "");
+  static_assert(sizeof(Waiter::storage_) < sizeof(ReturnType), "");
+};
+
+template <typename T, bool>
+struct Sizeof_;
+template <typename T>
+struct Sizeof_<T, false> : index_constant<sizeof(T)> {};
+template <typename T>
+struct Sizeof_<T, true> : index_constant<0> {};
+template <typename T>
+struct Sizeof : Sizeof_<T, std::is_void<T>::value> {};
+
+// we need to use std::integral_constant::value here as opposed to
+// std::integral_constant::operator T() because MSVC errors out with the
+// implicit conversion
+template <typename Func, typename Waiter>
+using CoalescedTask = std::conditional_t<
+    std::is_void<folly::invoke_result_t<const Func&>>::value,
+    TaskWithoutCoalesce<Func, Waiter>,
+    std::conditional_t<
+        Sizeof<folly::invoke_result_t<const Func&>>::value <=
+            sizeof(Waiter::storage_),
+        TaskWithCoalesce<Func, Waiter>,
+        TaskWithBigReturnValue<Func, Waiter>>>;
+
+/**
+ * Given a request and a wait node, coalesce them into a CoalescedTask that
+ * coalesces the return value into the wait node when invoked from a remote
+ * thread
+ *
+ * When given a null request through nullptr_t, coalesce() returns null as well
+ */
+template <typename Waiter>
+std::nullptr_t coalesce(std::nullptr_t&, Waiter&) {
+  return nullptr;
+}
+
+template <
+    typename Request,
+    typename Waiter,
+    typename Func = typename Request::F>
+CoalescedTask<Func, Waiter> coalesce(Request& request, Waiter& waiter) {
+  static_assert(!std::is_same<Request, std::nullptr_t>{}, "");
+  return CoalescedTask<Func, Waiter>{request.func_, waiter};
+}
+
+/**
+ * Given a task, create storage for the return value.  When we get a type
+ * of CoalescedTask, this returns an instance of CoalescedTask::StorageType.
+ * std::nullptr_t otherwise
+ */
+inline std::nullptr_t makeReturnValueStorageFor(std::nullptr_t&) {
+  return {};
+}
+
+template <
+    typename CoalescedTask,
+    typename StorageType = typename CoalescedTask::StorageType>
+StorageType makeReturnValueStorageFor(CoalescedTask&) {
+  return {};
+}
+
+/**
+ * Given a task and storage, attach them together if needed.  This only helps
+ * when we have a task that returns a value bigger than can be coalesced.  In
+ * that case, we need to attach the storage with the task so the return value
+ * can be transferred to this thread from the remote thread
+ */
+template <typename Task, typename Storage>
+void attach(Task&, Storage&) {
+  static_assert(
+      std::is_same<Storage, std::nullptr_t>{} ||
+          std::is_same<Storage, folly::Unit>{},
+      "");
+}
+
+template <
+    typename R,
+    typename W,
+    typename StorageType = typename TaskWithBigReturnValue<R, W>::StorageType>
+void attach(TaskWithBigReturnValue<R, W>& task, StorageType& storage) {
+  task.attach(&storage);
+}
+
+template <typename Request, typename Waiter>
+void throwIfExceptionOccurred(Request&, Waiter& waiter, bool exception) {
+  using Storage = decltype(waiter.storage_);
+  using F = typename Request::F;
+  static_assert(sizeof(Storage) >= sizeof(std::exception_ptr), "");
+  static_assert(alignof(Storage) >= alignof(std::exception_ptr), "");
+
+  // we only need to check for an exception in the waiter struct if the passed
+  // callable is not noexcept
+  //
+  // we need to make another instance of the exception with automatic storage
+  // duration and destroy the exception held in the storage *before throwing* to
+  // avoid leaks.  If we don't destroy the exception_ptr in storage, the
+  // refcount for the internal exception will never hit zero, thereby leaking
+  // memory
+  if (FOLLY_UNLIKELY(!folly::is_nothrow_invocable_v<const F&> && exception)) {
+    auto storage = &waiter.storage_;
+    auto exc = std::launder(reinterpret_cast<std::exception_ptr*>(storage));
+    auto copy = std::move(*exc);
+    exc->std::exception_ptr::~exception_ptr();
+    std::rethrow_exception(std::move(copy));
+  }
+}
+
+/**
+ * Given a CoalescedTask, a wait node and a request.  Detach the return value
+ * into the request from the wait node and task.
+ */
+template <typename Waiter>
+void detach(std::nullptr_t&, Waiter&, bool exception, std::nullptr_t&) {
+  DCHECK(!exception);
+}
+
+template <typename Waiter, typename F>
+void detach(
+    RequestWithoutReturn<F>& request,
+    Waiter& waiter,
+    bool exception,
+    folly::Unit&) {
+  throwIfExceptionOccurred(request, waiter, exception);
+}
+
+template <typename Waiter, typename F>
+void detach(
+    RequestWithReturn<F>& request,
+    Waiter& waiter,
+    bool exception,
+    folly::Unit&) {
+  throwIfExceptionOccurred(request, waiter, exception);
+
+  using ReturnType = typename RequestWithReturn<F>::ReturnType;
+  static_assert(!std::is_same<ReturnType, void>{}, "");
+  static_assert(sizeof(waiter.storage_) >= sizeof(ReturnType), "");
+
+  auto& val = *std::launder(reinterpret_cast<ReturnType*>(&waiter.storage_));
+  new (&request.value_) ReturnType{std::move(val)};
+  val.~ReturnType();
+}
+
+template <typename Waiter, typename F, typename Storage>
+void detach(
+    RequestWithReturn<F>& request,
+    Waiter& waiter,
+    bool exception,
+    Storage& storage) {
+  throwIfExceptionOccurred(request, waiter, exception);
+
+  using ReturnType = typename RequestWithReturn<F>::ReturnType;
+  static_assert(!std::is_same<ReturnType, void>{}, "");
+  static_assert(sizeof(storage) >= sizeof(ReturnType), "");
+
+  auto& val = *std::launder(reinterpret_cast<ReturnType*>(&storage));
+  new (&request.value_) ReturnType{std::move(val)};
+  val.~ReturnType();
+}
+
+/**
+ * Get the time since epoch in CPU cycles
+ *
+ * This is faster than std::chrono::steady_clock because it avoids a VDSO
+ * access to get the timestamp counter
+ *
+ * Note that the hardware timestamp counter on x86, like std::steady_clock is
+ * guaranteed to be monotonically increasing -
+ * https://c9x.me/x86/html/file_module_x86_id_278.html
+ */
+inline CpuTicks time() {
+  return static_cast<CpuTicks>(hardware_timestamp());
+}
+
+/**
+ * Zero out the other bits used by the implementation and return just an
+ * address from a uintptr_t
+ */
+template <typename Type>
+Type* extractPtr(std::uintptr_t from) {
+  // shift one bit off the end, to get all 1s followed by a single 0
+  auto mask = std::numeric_limits<std::uintptr_t>::max();
+  mask >>= 1;
+  mask <<= 1;
+  CHECK(!(mask & 0b1));
+
+  return folly::bit_cast<Type*>(from & mask);
+}
+
+/**
+ * Strips the given CPU timestamp into only the least significant 56 bits by
+ * moving the least significant 56 bits over by 8 zeroing out the bottom 8
+ * bits to be used as a medium of information transfer for the thread wait
+ * nodes
+ */
+inline std::uint64_t strip(CpuTicks time) {
+  return static_cast<std::uint64_t>(time) << 8;
+}
+
+/**
+ * Recover the timestamp value from an integer that has the timestamp encoded
+ * in it
+ */
+inline std::uint64_t recover(std::uint64_t from) {
+  return from >> 8;
+}
+
+template <template <typename> class Atomic, bool TimePublishing>
+class DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::DistributedMutexStateProxy {
+ public:
+  DistributedMutexStateProxy() = default;
+
+  DistributedMutexStateProxy(DistributedMutexStateProxy const&) = default;
+  DistributedMutexStateProxy& operator=(DistributedMutexStateProxy const&) =
+      default;
+
+  // The proxy is valid when a mutex acquisition attempt was successful,
+  // lock() is guaranteed to return a valid proxy, try_lock() is not
+  explicit operator bool() const { return expected_; }
+
+  // private:
+  // friend the mutex class, since that will be accessing state private to
+  // this class
+  friend class DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>;
+
+  DistributedMutexStateProxy(
+      Waiter<Atomic>* next,
+      std::uintptr_t expected,
+      bool timedWaiter = false,
+      bool combined = false,
+      std::uintptr_t waker = 0,
+      Waiter<Atomic>* waiters = nullptr,
+      Waiter<Atomic>* ready = nullptr)
+      : next_{next},
+        expected_{expected},
+        timedWaiters_{timedWaiter},
+        combined_{combined},
+        waker_{waker},
+        waiters_{waiters},
+        ready_{ready} {}
+
+  // the next thread that is to be woken up, this being null at the time of
+  // unlock() shows that the current thread acquired the mutex without
+  // contention or it was the terminal thread in the queue of threads waking up
+  Waiter<Atomic>* next_{nullptr};
+  // this is the value that the current thread should expect to find on
+  // unlock, and if this value is not there on unlock, the current thread
+  // should assume that other threads are enqueued waiting for the mutex
+  //
+  // note that if the mutex has the same state set at unlock time, and this is
+  // set to an address (and not say kLocked in the case of a terminal waker)
+  // then it must have been the case that no other thread had enqueued itself,
+  // since threads in the domain of this mutex do not share stack space
+  //
+  // if we want to support stack sharing, we can solve the problem by looping
+  // at lock time, and setting a variable that says whether we have acquired
+  // the lock or not perhaps
+  std::uintptr_t expected_{0};
+  // a boolean that will be set when the mutex has timed waiters that the
+  // current thread is responsible for waking, in such a case, the current
+  // thread will issue an atomic_notify_one() call after unlocking the mutex
+  //
+  // note that a timed waiter will itself always have this flag set.  This is
+  // done so we can avoid having to issue a atomic_notify_all() call (and
+  // subsequently a thundering herd) when waking up timed-wait threads
+  bool timedWaiters_{false};
+  // a boolean that contains true if the state proxy is not meant to be passed
+  // to the unlock() function.  This is set only when there is contention and
+  // a thread had asked for its critical section to be combined
+  bool combined_{false};
+  // metadata passed along from the thread that woke this thread up
+  std::uintptr_t waker_{0};
+  // the list of threads that are waiting on a futex
+  //
+  // the current threads is meant to wake up this list of waiters if it is
+  // able to commit an unlock() on the mutex without seeing a contention chain
+  Waiter<Atomic>* waiters_{nullptr};
+  // after a thread has woken up from a futex() call, it will have the rest of
+  // the threads that it were waiting behind it in this list, a thread that
+  // unlocks has to wake up threads from this list if it has any, before it
+  // goes to sleep to prevent pathological unfairness
+  Waiter<Atomic>* ready_{nullptr};
+};
+
+template <template <typename> class Atomic, bool TimePublishing>
+DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::DistributedMutex()
+    : state_{kUnlocked} {}
+
+template <typename Waiter>
+std::uint64_t publish(
+    std::uint64_t spins,
+    CpuTicks current,
+    CpuTicks previous,
+    CpuTicks elapsed,
+    bool& shouldPublish,
+    Waiter& waiter,
+    std::uint32_t waitMode) {
+  // time publishing has some overhead because it executes an atomic exchange on
+  // the futex word.  If this line is in a remote thread (eg.  the combiner),
+  // then each time we publish a timestamp, this thread has to submit an RFO to
+  // the remote core for the cacheline, blocking progress for both threads.
+  //
+  // the remote core uses a store in the fast path - why then does an RFO make a
+  // difference?  The only educated guess we have here is that the added
+  // roundtrip delays draining of the store buffer, which essentially exerts
+  // backpressure on future stores, preventing parallelization
+  //
+  // if we have requested a combine, time publishing is less important as it
+  // only comes into play when the combiner has exhausted their max combine
+  // passes.  So we defer time publishing to the point when the current thread
+  // gets preempted
+  if (previous != CpuTicks{0} &&
+      (current - previous) >= kScheduledAwaySpinThreshold) {
+    shouldPublish = true;
+  }
+
+  // if we have requested a combine, and this is the first iteration of the
+  // wait-loop, we publish a max timestamp to optimistically convey that we have
+  // not yet been preempted (the remote knows the meaning of max timestamps)
+  //
+  // then if we are under the maximum number of spins allowed before sleeping,
+  // we publish the exact timestamp, otherwise we publish the minimum possible
+  // timestamp to force the waking thread to skip us
+  auto now = ((waitMode == kCombineWaiting) && !spins)
+      ? std::numeric_limits<CpuTicks>::max()
+      : (elapsed < kMaxSpinTime) ? current
+                                 : CpuTicks{0};
+  // the wait mode information is published in the bottom 8 bits of the futex
+  // word, the rest contains time information as computed above.  Overflows are
+  // not really a correctness concern because time publishing is only a
+  // heuristic.  This leaves us 56 bits of nanoseconds (2 years) before we hit
+  // two consecutive wraparounds, so the lack of bits to respresent time is
+  // neither a performance nor correctness concern
+  auto data = strip(now) | waitMode;
+  auto signal = (shouldPublish || !spins || (waitMode != kCombineWaiting))
+      ? waiter.futex_.exchange(data, std::memory_order_acq_rel)
+      : waiter.futex_.load(std::memory_order_acquire);
+  return signal & std::numeric_limits<std::uint8_t>::max();
+}
+
+template <typename Waiter>
+bool spin(Waiter& waiter, std::uint32_t& sig, std::uint32_t mode) {
+  auto spins = std::uint64_t{0};
+  auto waitMode = (mode == kCombineUninitialized) ? kCombineWaiting : kWaiting;
+  auto previous = CpuTicks{0};
+  auto shouldPublish = false;
+  // elapsed is unsigned and will intentionally underflows if time goes back
+  for (CpuTicks start = time(), current = start, elapsed = 0;;
+       previous = current, current = time(), elapsed = current - start) {
+    auto signal = publish(
+        spins++, current, previous, elapsed, shouldPublish, waiter, waitMode);
+
+    // if we got skipped, make a note of it and return if we got a skipped
+    // signal or a signal to wake up
+    auto skipped = (signal == kSkipped);
+    auto combined = (signal == kCombined);
+    auto exceptionOccurred = (signal == kExceptionOccurred);
+    auto woken = (signal == kWake);
+    if (skipped || woken || combined || exceptionOccurred) {
+      sig = static_cast<std::uint32_t>(signal);
+      return !skipped;
+    }
+
+    // if we are under the spin threshold, pause to allow the other
+    // hyperthread to run.  If not, then sleep
+    if (elapsed < kMaxSpinTime) {
+      asm_volatile_pause();
+    } else {
+      std::this_thread::sleep_for(folly::detail::Sleeper::kMinYieldingSleep);
+    }
+  }
+}
+
+template <typename Waiter>
+void doFutexWake(Waiter* waiter) {
+  if (waiter) {
+    // We can use a simple store operation here and not worry about checking
+    // to see if the thread had actually started waiting on the futex, that is
+    // already done in tryWake() when a sleeping thread is collected
+    //
+    // We now do not know whether the waiter had already enqueued on the futex
+    // or whether it had just stored kSleeping in its futex and was about to
+    // call futexWait().  We treat both these scenarios the same
+    //
+    // the below can theoretically cause a problem if we set the
+    // wake signal and the waiter was in between setting kSleeping in its
+    // futex and enqueueing on the futex.  In this case the waiter will just
+    // return from futexWait() immediately.  This leaves the address that the
+    // waiter was using for futexWait() possibly dangling, and the thread that
+    // we woke in the exchange above might have used that address for some
+    // other object
+    //
+    // however, even if the thread had indeed woken up simply becasue of the
+    // above exchange(), the futexWake() below is not incorrect.  It is not
+    // incorrect because futexWake() does not actually change the memory of
+    // the futex word.  It just uses the address to do a lookup in the kernel
+    // futex table.  And even if we call futexWake() on some other address,
+    // and that address was being used to wait on futex() that thread will
+    // protect itself from spurious wakeups, check the value in the futex word
+    // and enqueue itself back on the futex
+    //
+    // this dangilng pointer possibility is why we use a pointer to the futex
+    // word, and avoid dereferencing after the store() operation
+    auto sleeper = &waiter->metadata_.sleeper_;
+    sleeper->store(kWake, std::memory_order_release);
+    futexWake(sleeper, 1);
+  }
+}
+
+template <typename Waiter>
+bool doFutexWait(Waiter* waiter, Waiter*& next) {
+  // first we get ready to sleep by calling exchange() on the futex with a
+  // kSleeping value
+  DCHECK(waiter->futex_.load(std::memory_order_relaxed) == kAboutToWait);
+
+  // note the semantics of using a futex here, when we exchange the sleeper_
+  // with kSleeping, we are getting ready to sleep, but before sleeping we get
+  // ready to sleep, and we return from futexWait() when the value of
+  // sleeper_ might have changed.  We can also wake up because of a spurious
+  // wakeup, so we always check against the value in sleeper_ after returning
+  // from futexWait(), if the value is not kWake, then we continue
+  auto pre =
+      waiter->metadata_.sleeper_.exchange(kSleeping, std::memory_order_acq_rel);
+
+  // Seeing a kSleeping on a futex word before we set it ourselves means only
+  // one thing - an unlocking thread caught us before we went to futex(), and
+  // we now have the lock, so we abort
+  //
+  // if we were given an early delivery, we can return from this function with
+  // a true, meaning that we now have the lock
+  if (pre == kSleeping) {
+    return true;
+  }
+
+  // if we reach here then were were not given an early delivery, and any
+  // thread that goes to wake us up will see a consistent view of the rest of
+  // the contention chain (since the next_ variable is set before the
+  // kSleeping exchange above)
+  while (pre != kWake) {
+    // before enqueueing on the futex, we wake any waiters that we were
+    // possibly responsible for
+    doFutexWake(std::exchange(next, nullptr));
+
+    // then we wait on the futex
+    //
+    // note that we have to protect ourselves against spurious wakeups here.
+    // Because the corresponding futexWake() above does not synchronize
+    // wakeups around the futex word.  Because doing so would become
+    // inefficient
+    futexWait(&waiter->metadata_.sleeper_, kSleeping);
+    pre = waiter->metadata_.sleeper_.load(std::memory_order_acquire);
+    DCHECK((pre == kSleeping) || (pre == kWake));
+  }
+
+  // when coming out of a futex, we might have some other sleeping threads
+  // that we were supposed to wake up, assign that to the next pointer
+  DCHECK(next == nullptr);
+  next = extractPtr<Waiter>(waiter->next_.load(std::memory_order_relaxed));
+  return false;
+}
+
+template <typename Waiter>
+bool wait(Waiter* waiter, std::uint32_t mode, Waiter*& next, uint32_t& signal) {
+  if (mode == kAboutToWait) {
+    return doFutexWait(waiter, next);
+  }
+
+  return spin(*waiter, signal, mode);
+}
+
+inline void recordTimedWaiterAndClearTimedBit(
+    bool& timedWaiter, std::uintptr_t& previous) {
+  // the previous value in the mutex can never be kTimedWaiter, timed waiters
+  // always set (kTimedWaiter | kLocked) in the mutex word when they try and
+  // acquire the mutex
+  DCHECK(previous != kTimedWaiter);
+
+  if (FOLLY_UNLIKELY(previous & kTimedWaiter)) {
+    // record whether there was a timed waiter in the previous mutex state, and
+    // clear the timed bit from the previous state
+    timedWaiter = true;
+    previous = previous & (~kTimedWaiter);
+  }
+}
+
+template <typename Atomic>
+void wakeTimedWaiters(Atomic* state, bool timedWaiters) {
+  if (FOLLY_UNLIKELY(timedWaiters)) {
+    folly::atomic_notify_one(state); // evade ADL
+  }
+}
+
+template <template <typename> class Atomic, bool TimePublishing>
+template <typename Func>
+auto DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::lock_combine(Func func)
+    -> folly::invoke_result_t<const Func&> {
+  // invoke the lock implementation function and check whether we came out of
+  // it with our task executed as a combined critical section.  This usually
+  // happens when the mutex is contended.
+  //
+  // In the absence of contention, we just return from the try_lock() function
+  // with the lock acquired.  So we need to invoke the task and unlock
+  // the mutex before returning
+  auto&& task = Request<Func>{func};
+  auto&& state = lockImplementation(*this, state_, task);
+  if (!state.combined_) {
+    // to avoid having to play a return-value dance when the combinable
+    // returns void, we use a scope exit to perform the unlock after the
+    // function return has been processed
+    SCOPE_EXIT {
+      unlock(std::move(state));
+    };
+    return func();
+  }
+
+  // if we are here, that means we were able to get our request combined, we
+  // can return the value that was transferred to us
+  //
+  // each thread that enqueues as a part of a contention chain takes up the
+  // responsibility of any timed waiter that had come immediately before it,
+  // so we wake up timed waiters before exiting the lock function.  Another
+  // strategy might be to add the timed waiter information to the metadata and
+  // let a single leader wake up a timed waiter for better concurrency.  But
+  // this has proven not to be useful in benchmarks beyond a small 5% delta,
+  // so we avoid taking the complexity hit and branch to wake up timed waiters
+  // from each thread
+  wakeTimedWaiters(&state_, state.timedWaiters_);
+  return std::move(task).get();
+}
+
+template <template <typename> class Atomic, bool TimePublishing>
+typename DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::DistributedMutexStateProxy
+DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::lock() {
+  auto null = nullptr;
+  return lockImplementation(*this, state_, null);
+}
+
+template <template <typename> class Atomic, bool TimePublishing>
+template <typename Rep, typename Period, typename Func>
+folly::Optional<invoke_result_t<Func&>>
+DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::try_lock_combine_for(
+    const std::chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& duration, Func func) {
+  auto state = try_lock_for(duration);
+  if (state) {
+    SCOPE_EXIT {
+      unlock(std::move(state));
+    };
+    return func();
+  }
+
+  return folly::none;
+}
+
+template <template <typename> class Atomic, bool TimePublishing>
+template <typename Clock, typename Duration, typename Func>
+folly::Optional<invoke_result_t<Func&>>
+DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::try_lock_combine_until(
+    const std::chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& deadline, Func func) {
+  auto state = try_lock_until(deadline);
+  if (state) {
+    SCOPE_EXIT {
+      unlock(std::move(state));
+    };
+    return func();
+  }
+
+  return folly::none;
+}
+
+template <typename Atomic, template <typename> class A, bool T>
+auto tryLockNoLoad(Atomic& atomic, DistributedMutex<A, T>&) {
+  // Try and set the least significant bit of the centralized lock state to 1,
+  // if this succeeds, it must have been the case that we had a kUnlocked (or
+  // 0) in the central storage before, since that is the only case where a 0
+  // can be found in the least significant bit
+  //
+  // If this fails, then it is a no-op
+  using Proxy = typename DistributedMutex<A, T>::DistributedMutexStateProxy;
+  auto previous = atomic_fetch_set(atomic, 0, std::memory_order_acquire);
+  return Proxy{nullptr, previous ? 0 : kLocked};
+}
+
+template <template <typename> class Atomic, bool TimePublishing>
+typename DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::DistributedMutexStateProxy
+DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::try_lock() {
+  // The lock attempt below requires an expensive atomic fetch-and-mutate or
+  // an even more expensive atomic compare-and-swap loop depending on the
+  // platform.  These operations require pulling the lock cacheline into the
+  // current core in exclusive mode and are therefore hard to parallelize
+  //
+  // This probabilistically avoids the expense by first checking whether the
+  // mutex is currently locked
+  if (state_.load(std::memory_order_relaxed) != kUnlocked) {
+    return DistributedMutexStateProxy{nullptr, 0};
+  }
+
+  return tryLockNoLoad(state_, *this);
+}
+
+template <
+    template <typename>
+    class Atomic,
+    bool TimePublishing,
+    typename State,
+    typename Request>
+typename DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::DistributedMutexStateProxy
+lockImplementation(
+    DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>& mutex,
+    State& atomic,
+    Request& request) {
+  // first try and acquire the lock as a fast path, the underlying
+  // implementation is slightly faster than using std::atomic::exchange() as
+  // is used in this function.  So we get a small perf boost in the
+  // uncontended case
+  //
+  // We only go through this fast path for the lock/unlock usage and avoid this
+  // for combined critical sections.  This check adds unnecessary overhead in
+  // that case as it causes an extra cacheline bounce
+  constexpr auto combineRequested = !std::is_same<Request, std::nullptr_t>{};
+  if (!combineRequested) {
+    if (auto state = tryLockNoLoad(atomic, mutex)) {
+      return state;
+    }
+  }
+
+  auto previous = std::uintptr_t{0};
+  auto waitMode = combineRequested ? kCombineUninitialized : kUninitialized;
+  auto nextWaitMode = kAboutToWait;
+  auto timedWaiter = false;
+  Waiter<Atomic>* nextSleeper = nullptr;
+  while (true) {
+    // construct the state needed to wait
+    //
+    // We can't use auto here because MSVC errors out due to a missing copy
+    // constructor
+    Waiter<Atomic> state{};
+    auto&& task = coalesce(request, state);
+    auto&& storage = makeReturnValueStorageFor(task);
+    auto&& address = folly::bit_cast<std::uintptr_t>(&state);
+    attach(task, storage);
+    state.initialize(waitMode, std::move(task));
+    DCHECK(!(address & 0b1));
+
+    // set the locked bit in the address we will be persisting in the mutex
+    address |= kLocked;
+
+    // attempt to acquire the mutex, mutex acquisition is successful if the
+    // previous value is zeroed out
+    //
+    // we use memory_order_acq_rel here because we want the read-modify-write
+    // operation to be both acquire and release.  Acquire because if this is a
+    // successful lock acquisition, we want to acquire state any other thread
+    // has released from a prior unlock.  We want release semantics because
+    // other threads that read the address of this value should see the full
+    // well-initialized node we are going to wait on if the mutex acquisition
+    // was unsuccessful
+    previous = atomic.exchange(address, std::memory_order_acq_rel);
+    recordTimedWaiterAndClearTimedBit(timedWaiter, previous);
+    state.next_.store(previous, std::memory_order_relaxed);
+    if (previous == kUnlocked) {
+      return {
+          /* next */ nullptr,
+          /* expected */ address,
+          /* timedWaiter */ timedWaiter,
+          /* combined */ false,
+          /* waker */ 0,
+          /* waiters */ nullptr,
+          /* ready */ nextSleeper};
+    }
+    DCHECK(previous & kLocked);
+
+    // wait until we get a signal from another thread, if this returns false,
+    // we got skipped and had probably been scheduled out, so try again
+    auto signal = kUninitialized;
+    if (!wait(&state, waitMode, nextSleeper, signal)) {
+      std::swap(waitMode, nextWaitMode);
+      continue;
+    }
+
+    // at this point it is safe to access the other fields in the waiter state,
+    // since the thread that woke us up is gone and nobody will be touching this
+    // state again, note that this requires memory ordering, and this is why we
+    // use memory_order_acquire (among other reasons) in the above wait
+    //
+    // first we see if the value we took off the mutex state was the thread that
+    // initated the wakeups, if so, we are the terminal node of the current
+    // contention chain.  If we are the terminal node, then we should expect to
+    // see a kLocked in the mutex state when we unlock, if we see that, we can
+    // commit the unlock to the centralized mutex state.  If not, we need to
+    // continue wakeups
+    //
+    // a nice consequence of passing kLocked as the current address if we are
+    // the terminal node is that it naturally just works with the algorithm.  If
+    // we get a contention chain when coming out of a contention chain, the tail
+    // of the new contention chain will have kLocked set as the previous, which,
+    // as it happens "just works", since we have now established a recursive
+    // relationship until broken
+    auto next = previous;
+    auto expected = address;
+    if (previous == state.metadata_.waker_) {
+      next = 0;
+      expected = kLocked;
+    }
+
+    // if we were given a combine signal, detach the return value from the
+    // wait struct into the request, so the current thread can access it
+    // outside this function
+    auto combined = (signal == kCombined);
+    auto exceptionOccurred = (signal == kExceptionOccurred);
+    if (combined || exceptionOccurred) {
+      detach(request, state, exceptionOccurred, storage);
+    }
+
+    // if we are just coming out of a futex call, then it means that the next
+    // waiter we are responsible for is also a waiter waiting on a futex, so
+    // we return that list in the list of ready threads.  We wlil be waking up
+    // the ready threads on unlock no matter what
+    return {
+        /* next */ extractPtr<Waiter<Atomic>>(next),
+        /* expected */ expected,
+        /* timedWaiter */ timedWaiter,
+        /* combined */ combineRequested && (combined || exceptionOccurred),
+        /* waker */ state.metadata_.waker_,
+        /* waiters */ extractPtr<Waiter<Atomic>>(state.metadata_.waiters_),
+        /* ready */ nextSleeper};
+  }
+}
+
+inline bool preempted(std::uint64_t value, CpuTicks now) {
+  auto currentTime = recover(strip(now));
+  auto nodeTime = recover(value);
+  auto preempted = (currentTime > nodeTime + kScheduledAwaySpinThreshold) &&
+      (nodeTime != recover(strip(std::numeric_limits<CpuTicks>::max())));
+
+  // we say that the thread has been preempted if its timestamp says so, and
+  // also if it is neither uninitialized nor skipped
+  DCHECK(value != kSkipped);
+  return (preempted) && (value != kUninitialized) &&
+      (value != kCombineUninitialized);
+}
+
+inline bool isSleeper(std::uintptr_t value) {
+  return (value == kAboutToWait);
+}
+
+inline bool isInitialized(std::uintptr_t value) {
+  return (value != kUninitialized) && (value != kCombineUninitialized);
+}
+
+inline bool isCombiner(std::uintptr_t value) {
+  auto mode = (value & 0xff);
+  return (mode == kCombineWaiting) || (mode == kCombineUninitialized);
+}
+
+inline bool isWaitingCombiner(std::uintptr_t value) {
+  return (value & 0xff) == kCombineWaiting;
+}
+
+template <typename Waiter>
+CombineFunction loadTask(Waiter* current, std::uintptr_t value) {
+  // if we know that the waiter is a combiner of some sort, it is safe to read
+  // and copy the value of the function in the waiter struct, since we know
+  // that a waiter would have set it before enqueueing
+  if (isCombiner(value)) {
+    return current->function_;
+  }
+
+  return nullptr;
+}
+
+template <typename Waiter>
+[[FOLLY_ATTR_GNU_COLD]] void transferCurrentException(Waiter* waiter) {
+  DCHECK(current_exception());
+  new (&waiter->storage_) std::exception_ptr{current_exception()};
+  waiter->futex_.store(kExceptionOccurred, std::memory_order_release);
+}
+
+template <template <typename> class Atomic>
+FOLLY_ALWAYS_INLINE std::uintptr_t tryCombine(
+    Waiter<Atomic>* waiter,
+    std::uintptr_t value,
+    std::uintptr_t next,
+    std::uint64_t iteration,
+    CpuTicks now,
+    CombineFunction task) {
+  // if the waiter has asked for a combine operation, we should combine its
+  // critical section and move on to the next waiter
+  //
+  // the waiter is combinable if the following conditions are satisfied
+  //
+  //  1) the state in the futex word is not uninitialized (kUninitialized)
+  //  2) it has a valid combine function
+  //  3) we are not past the limit of the number of combines we can perform
+  //     or the waiter thread been preempted.  If the waiter gets preempted,
+  //     its better to just execute their critical section before moving on.
+  //     As they will have to re-queue themselves after preemption anyway,
+  //     leading to further delays in critical section completion
+  //
+  // if all the above are satisfied, then we can combine the critical section.
+  // Note that if the waiter is in a combineable state, that means that it had
+  // finished its writes to both the task and the next_ value.  And observing
+  // a waiting state also means that we have acquired the writes to the other
+  // members of the waiter struct, so it's fine to use those values here
+  if (isWaitingCombiner(value) &&
+      (iteration <= kMaxCombineIterations || preempted(value, now))) {
+    catch_exception(
+        [&] {
+          task();
+          waiter->futex_.store(kCombined, std::memory_order_release);
+        },
+        [&] { transferCurrentException(waiter); });
+    return next;
+  }
+
+  return 0;
+}
+
+template <typename Waiter>
+FOLLY_ALWAYS_INLINE std::uintptr_t tryWake(
+    bool publishing,
+    Waiter* waiter,
+    std::uintptr_t value,
+    std::uintptr_t next,
+    std::uintptr_t waker,
+    Waiter*& sleepers,
+    std::uint64_t iteration,
+    CombineFunction task) {
+  // try and combine the waiter's request first, if that succeeds that means
+  // we have successfully executed their critical section and can move on to
+  // the rest of the chain
+  auto now = time();
+  if (tryCombine(waiter, value, next, iteration, now, task)) {
+    return next;
+  }
+
+  // first we see if we can wake the current thread that is spinning
+  if ((!publishing || !preempted(value, now)) && !isSleeper(value)) {
+    // the Metadata class should be trivially destructible as we use placement
+    // new to set the relevant metadata without calling any destructor.  We
+    // need to use placement new because the class contains a futex, which is
+    // non-movable and non-copyable
+    using Metadata = std::decay_t<decltype(waiter->metadata_)>;
+    static_assert(std::is_trivially_destructible<Metadata>{}, "");
+
+    // we need release here because of the write to waker_ and also because we
+    // are unlocking the mutex, the thread we do the handoff to here should
+    // see the modified data
+    new (&waiter->metadata_)
+        Metadata{waker, folly::bit_cast<uintptr_t>(sleepers)};
+    waiter->futex_.store(kWake, std::memory_order_release);
+    return 0;
+  }
+
+  // if the thread is not a sleeper, and we were not able to catch it before
+  // preemption, we can just return a false, it is safe to read next_ because
+  // the thread was preempted.  Preemption signals can only come after the
+  // thread has set the next_ pointer, since the timestamp writes only start
+  // occurring after that point
+  //
+  // if a thread was preempted it must have stored next_ in the waiter struct,
+  // as the store to futex_ that resets the value from kUninitialized happens
+  // after the write to next
+  CHECK(publishing);
+  if (!isSleeper(value)) {
+    // go on to the next one
+    //
+    // Also, we need a memory_order_release here to prevent missed wakeups.  A
+    // missed wakeup here can happen when we see that a thread had been
+    // preempted and skip it.  Then go on to release the lock, and then when
+    // the thread which got skipped does an exchange on the central storage,
+    // still sees the locked bit, and never gets woken up
+    //
+    // Can we relax this?
+    DCHECK(preempted(value, now));
+    DCHECK(!isCombiner(value));
+    next = waiter->next_.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
+    waiter->futex_.store(kSkipped, std::memory_order_release);
+    return next;
+  }
+
+  // if we are here the thread is a sleeper
+  //
+  // we attempt to catch the thread before it goes to futex().  If we are able
+  // to catch the thread before it sleeps on a futex, we are done, and don't
+  // need to go any further
+  //
+  // if we are not able to catch the thread before it goes to futex, we
+  // collect the current thread in the list of sleeping threads represented by
+  // sleepers, and return the next thread in the list and return false along
+  // with the previous next value
+  //
+  // it is safe to read the next_ pointer in the waiter struct if we were
+  // unable to catch the thread before it went to futex() because we use
+  // acquire-release ordering for the exchange operation below.  And if we see
+  // that the thread was already sleeping, we have synchronized with the write
+  // to next_ in the context of the sleeping thread
+  //
+  // Also we need to set the value of waiters_ and waker_ in the thread before
+  // doing the exchange because we need to pass on the list of sleepers in the
+  // event that we were able to catch the thread before it went to futex().
+  // If we were unable to catch the thread before it slept, these fields will
+  // be ignored when the thread wakes up anyway
+  DCHECK(isSleeper(value));
+  waiter->metadata_.waker_ = waker;
+  waiter->metadata_.waiters_ = folly::bit_cast<std::uintptr_t>(sleepers);
+  auto pre =
+      waiter->metadata_.sleeper_.exchange(kSleeping, std::memory_order_acq_rel);
+
+  // we were able to catch the thread before it went to sleep, return true
+  if (pre != kSleeping) {
+    return 0;
+  }
+
+  // otherwise return false, with the value of next_, it is safe to read next
+  // because of the same logic as when a thread was preempted
+  //
+  // we also need to collect this sleeper in the list of sleepers being built
+  // up
+  next = waiter->next_.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
+  auto head = folly::bit_cast<std::uintptr_t>(sleepers);
+  waiter->next_.store(head, std::memory_order_relaxed);
+  sleepers = waiter;
+  return next;
+}
+
+template <typename Waiter>
+bool wake(
+    bool publishing,
+    Waiter& waiter,
+    std::uintptr_t waker,
+    Waiter*& sleepers,
+    std::uint64_t iter) {
+  // loop till we find a node that is either at the end of the list (as
+  // specified by waker) or we find a node that is active (as specified by
+  // the last published timestamp of the node)
+  auto current = &waiter;
+  while (current) {
+    // it is important that we load the value of function and next_ after the
+    // initial acquire load.  This is required because we need to synchronize
+    // with the construction of the waiter struct before reading from it
+    //
+    // the load from the next_ variable is an optimistic load that assumes
+    // that the waiting thread has probably gone to the waiting state.  If the
+    // waiitng thread is in the waiting state (as revealed by the acquire load
+    // from the futex word), we will see a well formed next_ value because it
+    // happens-before the release store to the futex word.  The atomic load from
+    // next_ is an optimization to avoid branching before loading and prevent
+    // the compiler from eliding the load altogether (and using a pointer
+    // dereference when needed)
+    auto value = current->futex_.load(std::memory_order_acquire);
+    auto next = current->next_.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
+    auto task = loadTask(current, value);
+    next =
+        tryWake(publishing, current, value, next, waker, sleepers, iter, task);
+
+    // if there is no next node, we have managed to wake someone up and have
+    // successfully migrated the lock to another thread
+    if (!next) {
+      return true;
+    }
+
+    // we need to read the value of the next node in the list before skipping
+    // it, this is because after we skip it the node might wake up and enqueue
+    // itself, and thereby gain a new next node
+    CHECK(publishing);
+    current = (next == waker) ? nullptr : extractPtr<Waiter>(next);
+  }
+
+  return false;
+}
+
+template <typename Atomic, typename Proxy, typename Sleepers>
+bool tryUnlockClean(Atomic& state, Proxy& proxy, Sleepers sleepers) {
+  auto expected = proxy.expected_;
+  while (true) {
+    if (state.compare_exchange_strong(
+            expected,
+            kUnlocked,
+            std::memory_order_release,
+            std::memory_order_relaxed)) {
+      // if we were able to commit an unlocked, we need to wake up the futex
+      // waiters, if any
+      doFutexWake(sleepers);
+      return true;
+    }
+
+    // if we failed the compare_exchange_strong() above, we check to see if
+    // the failure was because of the presence of a timed waiter.  If that
+    // was the case then we try one more time with the kTimedWaiter bit set
+    if (FOLLY_UNLIKELY(expected == (proxy.expected_ | kTimedWaiter))) {
+      proxy.timedWaiters_ = true;
+      continue;
+    }
+
+    // otherwise break, we have a contention chain
+    return false;
+  }
+}
+
+template <template <typename> class Atomic, bool Publish>
+void DistributedMutex<Atomic, Publish>::unlock(
+    DistributedMutex::DistributedMutexStateProxy const& proxy_) {
+  auto proxy = proxy_;
+  // we always wake up ready threads and timed waiters if we saw either
+  DCHECK(proxy) << "Invalid proxy passed to DistributedMutex::unlock()";
+  DCHECK(!proxy.combined_) << "Cannot unlock mutex after a successful combine";
+  SCOPE_EXIT {
+    doFutexWake(proxy.ready_);
+    wakeTimedWaiters(&state_, proxy.timedWaiters_);
+  };
+
+  // if there is a wait queue we are responsible for, try and start wakeups,
+  // don't bother with the mutex state
+  auto sleepers = proxy.waiters_;
+  if (proxy.next_) {
+    if (wake(Publish, *proxy.next_, proxy.waker_, sleepers, 0)) {
+      return;
+    }
+
+    // At this point, if are in the if statement, we were not the terminal
+    // node of the wakeup chain.  Terminal nodes have the next_ pointer set to
+    // null in lock()
+    //
+    // So we need to pretend we were the end of the contention chain.  Coming
+    // out of a contention chain always has the kLocked state set in the
+    // mutex.  Unless there is another contention chain lined up, which does
+    // not matter since we are the terminal node anyway
+    proxy.expected_ = kLocked;
+  }
+
+  for (std::uint64_t i = 0; true; ++i) {
+    // otherwise, since we don't have anyone we need to wake up, we try and
+    // release the mutex just as is
+    //
+    // if this is successful, we can return, the unlock was successful, we have
+    // committed a nice kUnlocked to the central storage, yay
+    if (tryUnlockClean(state_, proxy, sleepers)) {
+      return;
+    }
+
+    // here we have a contention chain built up on the mutex.  We grab the
+    // wait queue and start executing wakeups.  We leave a locked bit on the
+    // centralized storage and handoff control to the head of the queue
+    //
+    // we use memory_order_acq_rel here because we want to see the
+    // full well-initialized node that the other thread is waiting on
+    //
+    // If we are unable to wake the contention chain, it is possible that when
+    // we come back to looping here, a new contention chain will form.  In
+    // that case we need to use kLocked as the waker_ value because the
+    // terminal node of the new chain will see kLocked in the central storage
+    auto head = state_.exchange(kLocked, std::memory_order_acq_rel);
+    recordTimedWaiterAndClearTimedBit(proxy.timedWaiters_, head);
+    auto next = extractPtr<Waiter<Atomic>>(head);
+    auto expected = std::exchange(proxy.expected_, kLocked);
+    DCHECK((head & kLocked) && (head != kLocked)) << "incorrect state " << head;
+    if (wake(Publish, *next, expected, sleepers, i)) {
+      break;
+    }
+  }
+}
+
+template <typename Atomic, typename Deadline, typename MakeProxy>
+auto timedLock(Atomic& state, Deadline deadline, MakeProxy proxy) {
+  while (true) {
+    // we put a bit on the central state to show that there is a timed waiter
+    // and go to sleep on the central state
+    //
+    // when this thread goes to unlock the mutex, it will expect a 0b1 in the
+    // mutex state (0b1, not 0b11), but then it will see that the value in the
+    // mutex state is 0b11 and not 0b1, meaning that there might have been
+    // another timed waiter.  Even though there might not have been another
+    // timed waiter in the time being.  This sort of missed wakeup is
+    // desirable for timed waiters; it helps avoid thundering herds of timed
+    // waiters.  Because the mutex is packed in 8 bytes, and we need an
+    // address to be stored in those 8 bytes, we don't have much room to play
+    // with.  The only other solution is to issue a futexWake(INT_MAX) to wake
+    // up all waiters when a clean unlock is committed, when a thread saw a
+    // timed waiter in the mutex previously.
+    //
+    // putting a 0b11 here works for a set of reasons that is a superset of
+    // the set of reasons that make it okay to put a kLocked (0b1) in the
+    // mutex state.  Now that the thread has put (kTimedWaiter | kLocked)
+    // (0b11) in the mutex state and it expects a kLocked (0b1), there are two
+    // scenarios possible.  The first being when there is no contention chain
+    // formation in the mutex from the time a timed waiter got a lock to
+    // unlock.  In this case, the unlocker sees a 0b11 in the mutex state,
+    // adjusts to the presence of a timed waiter and cleanly unlocks with a
+    // kUnlocked (0b0).  The second is when there is a contention chain.
+    // When a thread puts its address in the mutex and sees the timed bit, it
+    // records the presence of a timed waiter, and then pretends as if it
+    // hadn't seen the timed bit.  So future contention chain releases, will
+    // terminate with a kLocked (0b1) and not a (kLocked | kTimedWaiter)
+    // (0b11).  This just works naturally with the rest of the algorithm
+    // without incurring a perf hit for the regular non-timed case
+    //
+    // this strategy does however mean, that when threads try to acquire the
+    // mutex and all time out, there will be a wasteful syscall to issue wakeups
+    // to waiting threads.  We don't do anything to try and minimize this
+    //
+    // we need to use a fetch_or() here because we need to convey two bits of
+    // information - 1, whether the mutex is locked or not, and 2, whether
+    // there is a timed waiter.  The alternative here is to use the second bit
+    // to convey information only, we can use a fetch_set() on the second bit
+    // to make this faster, but that comes at the expense of requiring regular
+    // fast path lock attempts.  Which use a single bit read-modify-write for
+    // better performance
+    auto data = kTimedWaiter | kLocked;
+    auto previous = state.fetch_or(data, std::memory_order_acquire);
+    if (!(previous & 0b1)) {
+      DCHECK(!previous);
+      return proxy(nullptr, kLocked, true);
+    }
+
+    // wait on the futex until signalled, if we get a timeout, the try_lock
+    // fails
+    auto result = folly::atomic_wait_until( // evade ADL
+        &state,
+        previous | data,
+        deadline);
+    if (result == std::cv_status::timeout) {
+      return proxy(nullptr, std::uintptr_t{0}, false);
+    }
+  }
+}
+
+template <template <typename> class Atomic, bool TimePublishing>
+template <typename Clock, typename Duration>
+typename DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::DistributedMutexStateProxy
+DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::try_lock_until(
+    const std::chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& deadline) {
+  // fast path for the uncontended case
+  //
+  // we get the time after trying to acquire the mutex because in the
+  // uncontended case, the price of getting the time is about 1/3 of the
+  // actual mutex acquisition.  So we only pay the price of that extra bit of
+  // latency when needed
+  //
+  // this is even higher when VDSO is involved on architectures that do not
+  // offer a direct interface to the timestamp counter
+  if (auto state = try_lock()) {
+    return state;
+  }
+
+  // fall back to the timed locking algorithm
+  using Proxy = DistributedMutexStateProxy;
+  return timedLock(state_, deadline, [](auto... as) { return Proxy{as...}; });
+}
+
+template <template <typename> class Atomic, bool TimePublishing>
+template <typename Rep, typename Period>
+typename DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::DistributedMutexStateProxy
+DistributedMutex<Atomic, TimePublishing>::try_lock_for(
+    const std::chrono::duration<Rep, Period>& duration) {
+  // fast path for the uncontended case.  Reasoning for doing this here is the
+  // same as in try_lock_until()
+  if (auto state = try_lock()) {
+    return state;
+  }
+
+  // fall back to the timed locking algorithm
+  using Proxy = DistributedMutexStateProxy;
+  auto deadline = std::chrono::steady_clock::now() + duration;
+  return timedLock(state_, deadline, [](auto... as) { return Proxy{as...}; });
+}
+} // namespace distributed_mutex
+} // namespace detail
+} // namespace folly
+
+namespace std {
+
+template <template <typename> class Atom, bool TimePublishing>
+class unique_lock<
+    ::folly::detail::distributed_mutex::DistributedMutex<Atom, TimePublishing>>
+    : public ::folly::unique_lock_base<
+          ::folly::detail::distributed_mutex::
+              DistributedMutex<Atom, TimePublishing>> {
+ public:
+  using ::folly::unique_lock_base<
+      ::folly::detail::distributed_mutex::
+          DistributedMutex<Atom, TimePublishing>>::unique_lock_base;
+};
+
+template <template <typename> class Atom, bool TimePublishing>
+class lock_guard<
+    ::folly::detail::distributed_mutex::DistributedMutex<Atom, TimePublishing>>
+    : public ::folly::unique_lock_guard_base<
+          ::folly::detail::distributed_mutex::
+              DistributedMutex<Atom, TimePublishing>> {
+ public:
+  using ::folly::unique_lock_guard_base<
+      ::folly::detail::distributed_mutex::
+          DistributedMutex<Atom, TimePublishing>>::unique_lock_guard_base;
+};
+
+} // namespace std