From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: discuss@x86-64.org
Cc: Andrey Savochkin <saw@sawoct.com>, Kirill Korotaev <dev@sw.ru>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
xemul@sw.ru, st@sw.ru
Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: SMP syncronization on AMD processors (broken?)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 16:02:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200510061602.30558.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051006174604.B10342@castle.nmd.msu.ru>
On Thursday 06 October 2005 15:46, Andrey Savochkin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 03:32:30PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Kirill Korotaev <dev@sw.ru> writes:
> > > Please help with a not simple question about spin_lock/spin_unlock on
> > > SMP archs. The question is whether concurrent spin_lock()'s should
> > > acquire it in more or less "fair" fashinon or one of CPUs can starve
> > > any arbitrary time while others do reacquire it in a loop.
> >
> > They are not fully fair because of the NUMAness of the system.
> > Same on many other NUMA systems.
> >
> > We considered long ago to use queued locks to avoid this, but
> > they are quite costly for the uncongested case and never seemed worth it.
> >
> > So live with it.
>
> Well, it's hard to swallow...
> It's not about being not fully fair, it's about deadlocks that started
> to appear after code changes inside retry loops...
Don't do that then.
> A practical question is whether there is an "official" way to tell the CPU
> that it should synchronize with memory, or if you have ideas how to make it
> less costly than queued locks.
I don't think there is an way specified in the architecture. So you're
definitely in undocumented system dependent territory if you attempt this.
delay.
Or maybe a write combining access (movnti) follwed with a sfence.
> A theoretical question is how many places in the kernel use such retry
> loops that may start to fail some day (or on some machines)...
We already have such cases - e.g. our rwlocks always had such a deadlock
even on SMP systems. As far as I know it has been reported exactly once on a
64CPU IA64 system, but it wasn't possible to fix it without large scale
changes so it was ignored. I am not aware of the problem ever happening on a
production system.
And in general fairness was never a force of Linux. A lot of subsystems
do resource handling / sharing without taking it into account. And so far
we got away with it.
I'm not saying it's a good thing, but that general strategy
doesn't seem to have hurt us significantly so far and the fixes are usually
worse than the problems.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-06 14:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-06 13:05 SMP syncronization on AMD processors (broken?) Kirill Korotaev
2005-10-06 13:14 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2005-10-06 13:19 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-10-06 13:32 ` Andrey Savochkin
2005-10-06 14:22 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-10-06 13:32 ` Andi Kleen
2005-10-06 13:46 ` Andrey Savochkin
2005-10-06 14:02 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2005-10-06 14:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-06 15:21 ` Andrey Savochkin
2005-10-06 15:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-11 0:59 ` Andrew Morton
2005-10-11 1:20 ` Andi Kleen
2005-10-11 3:20 ` Joe Seigh
2005-10-06 13:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2005-10-06 13:56 ` [discuss] " Andi Kleen
2005-10-06 14:10 ` Eric Dumazet
2005-10-06 14:11 ` Andi Kleen
2005-10-06 14:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-06 15:34 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-10-06 15:53 ` Eric Dumazet
2005-10-06 16:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-10-07 20:38 ` Joe Seigh
2005-10-07 20:57 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-10-13 18:24 ` Joe Seigh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200510061602.30558.ak@suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=dev@sw.ru \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=saw@sawoct.com \
--cc=st@sw.ru \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=xemul@sw.ru \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.