From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: cebbert@redhat.com, chris@atlee.ca, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, kiran@scalex86.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] long freezes on thinkpad t60
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:36:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070618123646.GA22672@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1I0EJc-0007El-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
* Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
> > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> >
> > > how about the patch below? Boot-tested on 32-bit. As a side-effect
> > > this change also removes the 255 CPUs limit from the 32-bit kernel.
> >
> > boot-tested on 64-bit too now.
>
> Strange, I can't even get past the compile stage ;)
>
> CC kernel/spinlock.o
> {standard input}: Assembler messages:
> {standard input}:207: Error: backward ref to unknown label "4:"
oh, sorry - i built it with !PREEMPT, which doesnt make use of the flags
thing. I fixed the build and have cleaned up and simplified that code
some more - does the patch below work for you? (it does for me on both
32-bit and 64-bit)
Ingo
----------------------------->
Subject: [patch] x86: fix spin-loop starvation bug
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Miklos Szeredi reported very long pauses (several seconds, sometimes
more) on his T60 (with a Core2Duo) which he managed to track down to
wait_task_inactive()'s open-coded busy-loop. He observed that an
interrupt on one core tries to acquire the runqueue-lock but does not
succeed in doing so for a very long time - while wait_task_inactive() on
the other core loops waiting for the first core to deschedule a task
(which it wont do while spinning in an interrupt handler).
The problem is: both the spin_lock() code and the wait_task_inactive()
loop uses cpu_relax()/rep_nop(), so in theory the CPU should have
guaranteed MESI-fairness to the two cores - but that didnt happen: one
of the cores was able to monopolize the cacheline that holds the
runqueue lock, for extended periods of time.
This patch changes the spin-loop to assert an atomic op after every REP
NOP instance - this will cause the CPU to express its "MESI interest" in
that cacheline after every REP NOP.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
---
include/asm-i386/spinlock.h | 94 ++++++++++++++++--------------------------
include/asm-x86_64/spinlock.h | 69 +++++++++++++++---------------
2 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 91 deletions(-)
Index: linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q/include/asm-i386/spinlock.h
===================================================================
--- linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q.orig/include/asm-i386/spinlock.h
+++ linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q/include/asm-i386/spinlock.h
@@ -29,21 +29,24 @@
static inline int __raw_spin_is_locked(raw_spinlock_t *x)
{
- return *(volatile signed char *)(&(x)->slock) <= 0;
+ return *(volatile unsigned int *)(&(x)->slock) == 0;
}
static inline void __raw_spin_lock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
- asm volatile("\n1:\t"
- LOCK_PREFIX " ; decb %0\n\t"
- "jns 3f\n"
- "2:\t"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpb $0,%0\n\t"
- "jle 2b\n\t"
- "jmp 1b\n"
- "3:\n\t"
- : "+m" (lock->slock) : : "memory");
+ asm volatile(
+ "1: \n"
+ /* copy bit 0 to carry-flag and clear bit 0 */
+ LOCK_PREFIX " ; btrl $0, %[slock] \n"
+ " jc 2f \n"
+ /* PAUSE */
+ " rep; nop \n"
+ " jmp 1b \n"
+ "2: \n"
+ : [slock] "+m" (lock->slock)
+ :
+ : "memory", "cc"
+ );
}
/*
@@ -58,69 +61,46 @@ static inline void __raw_spin_lock(raw_s
static inline void __raw_spin_lock_flags(raw_spinlock_t *lock, unsigned long flags)
{
asm volatile(
- "\n1:\t"
- LOCK_PREFIX " ; decb %[slock]\n\t"
- "jns 5f\n"
- "2:\t"
- "testl $0x200, %[flags]\n\t"
- "jz 4f\n\t"
- STI_STRING "\n"
- "3:\t"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpb $0, %[slock]\n\t"
- "jle 3b\n\t"
- CLI_STRING "\n\t"
- "jmp 1b\n"
- "4:\t"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpb $0, %[slock]\n\t"
- "jg 1b\n\t"
- "jmp 4b\n"
- "5:\n\t"
+ "1: \n"
+ /* copy bit 0 to carry-flag and clear bit 0 */
+ LOCK_PREFIX " ; btrl $0, %[slock] \n"
+ " jc 3f \n"
+ /* were interrupts disabled? */
+ " testl $0x200, %[flags] \n"
+ " jz 2f \n"
+ STI_STRING "\n"
+ /* PAUSE */
+ "2: rep; nop \n"
+ CLI_STRING "\n"
+ " jmp 1b \n"
+ "3: \n"
: [slock] "+m" (lock->slock)
- : [flags] "r" (flags)
- CLI_STI_INPUT_ARGS
- : "memory" CLI_STI_CLOBBERS);
+ : [flags] "r" (flags)
+ CLI_STI_INPUT_ARGS
+ : "memory", "cc" CLI_STI_CLOBBERS);
}
#endif
static inline int __raw_spin_trylock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
- char oldval;
+ unsigned int oldval;
+
asm volatile(
- "xchgb %b0,%1"
+ "xchgl %0, %1"
:"=q" (oldval), "+m" (lock->slock)
:"0" (0) : "memory");
- return oldval > 0;
+
+ return oldval != 0;
}
/*
- * __raw_spin_unlock based on writing $1 to the low byte.
- * This method works. Despite all the confusion.
- * (except on PPro SMP or if we are using OOSTORE, so we use xchgb there)
- * (PPro errata 66, 92)
+ * __raw_spin_unlock based on writing $1 to the lock.
*/
-
-#if !defined(CONFIG_X86_OOSTORE) && !defined(CONFIG_X86_PPRO_FENCE)
-
-static inline void __raw_spin_unlock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
-{
- asm volatile("movb $1,%0" : "+m" (lock->slock) :: "memory");
-}
-
-#else
-
static inline void __raw_spin_unlock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
- char oldval = 1;
-
- asm volatile("xchgb %b0, %1"
- : "=q" (oldval), "+m" (lock->slock)
- : "0" (oldval) : "memory");
+ asm volatile("movl $1, %0" : "+m" (lock->slock) : : "memory");
}
-#endif
-
static inline void __raw_spin_unlock_wait(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
while (__raw_spin_is_locked(lock))
Index: linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q/include/asm-x86_64/spinlock.h
===================================================================
--- linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q.orig/include/asm-x86_64/spinlock.h
+++ linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q/include/asm-x86_64/spinlock.h
@@ -19,21 +19,24 @@
static inline int __raw_spin_is_locked(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
- return *(volatile signed int *)(&(lock)->slock) <= 0;
+ return *(volatile unsigned int *)(&(lock)->slock) == 0;
}
static inline void __raw_spin_lock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
asm volatile(
- "\n1:\t"
- LOCK_PREFIX " ; decl %0\n\t"
- "jns 2f\n"
- "3:\n"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpl $0,%0\n\t"
- "jle 3b\n\t"
- "jmp 1b\n"
- "2:\t" : "=m" (lock->slock) : : "memory");
+ "1: \n"
+ /* copy bit 0 to carry-flag and clear bit 0 */
+ LOCK_PREFIX " ; btrl $0, %[slock] \n"
+ " jc 2f \n"
+ /* PAUSE */
+ " rep; nop \n"
+ " jmp 1b \n"
+ "2: \n"
+ : [slock] "+m" (lock->slock)
+ :
+ : "memory", "cc"
+ );
}
/*
@@ -43,43 +46,41 @@ static inline void __raw_spin_lock(raw_s
static inline void __raw_spin_lock_flags(raw_spinlock_t *lock, unsigned long flags)
{
asm volatile(
- "\n1:\t"
- LOCK_PREFIX " ; decl %0\n\t"
- "jns 5f\n"
- "testl $0x200, %1\n\t" /* interrupts were disabled? */
- "jz 4f\n\t"
- "sti\n"
- "3:\t"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpl $0, %0\n\t"
- "jle 3b\n\t"
- "cli\n\t"
- "jmp 1b\n"
- "4:\t"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpl $0, %0\n\t"
- "jg 1b\n\t"
- "jmp 4b\n"
- "5:\n\t"
- : "+m" (lock->slock) : "r" ((unsigned)flags) : "memory");
+ "1: \n"
+ /* copy bit 0 to carry-flag and clear bit 0 */
+ LOCK_PREFIX " ; btrl $0, %[slock] \n"
+ " jc 3f \n"
+ /* were interrupts disabled? */
+ " testl $0x200, %[flags] \n"
+ " jz 2f \n"
+ " sti \n"
+ /* PAUSE */
+ "2: rep; nop \n"
+ " cli \n"
+ " jmp 1b \n"
+ "3: \n"
+ : [slock] "+m" (lock->slock)
+ : [flags] "r" ((unsigned int)flags)
+ : "memory", "cc"
+ );
}
#endif
static inline int __raw_spin_trylock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
- int oldval;
+ unsigned int oldval;
asm volatile(
- "xchgl %0,%1"
- :"=q" (oldval), "=m" (lock->slock)
+ "xchgl %0, %1"
+ :"=q" (oldval), "+m" (lock->slock)
:"0" (0) : "memory");
- return oldval > 0;
+ return oldval != 0;
}
static inline void __raw_spin_unlock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
- asm volatile("movl $1,%0" :"=m" (lock->slock) :: "memory");
+ asm volatile("movl $1, %0" : "+m" (lock->slock) : : "memory");
}
static inline void __raw_spin_unlock_wait(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-18 12:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 88+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-24 12:04 [BUG] long freezes on thinkpad t60 Miklos Szeredi
2007-05-24 12:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-24 14:03 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-05-24 14:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-24 14:28 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-05-24 14:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-24 14:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-24 17:09 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-05-24 21:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 9:51 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-14 16:04 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-15 21:25 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-06-16 10:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-17 21:46 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 6:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 7:24 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 8:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 8:20 ` Andrew Morton
2007-06-19 4:22 ` Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2007-06-18 8:25 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 8:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 8:34 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 9:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 9:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 9:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 10:18 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 12:36 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-06-18 13:10 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 16:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-18 17:41 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 17:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-18 18:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 18:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 18:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-20 9:36 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-20 17:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 7:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 15:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 16:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 16:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 16:44 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-06-21 17:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 18:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-06-21 18:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 19:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 20:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 20:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 21:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:42 ` [patch] spinlock debug: make looping nicer Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 21:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-22 7:00 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-21 20:36 ` [BUG] long freezes on thinkpad t60 Eric Dumazet
2007-06-21 19:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 20:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-26 8:42 ` Nick Piggin
2007-06-26 10:56 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-26 17:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-27 5:23 ` Nick Piggin
2007-06-27 6:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-27 6:20 ` Nick Piggin
2007-06-27 19:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-27 20:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-27 20:17 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-06-27 22:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-27 23:30 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-06-28 0:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-28 3:03 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-07-02 7:06 ` Nick Piggin
2007-06-21 20:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-22 8:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-23 10:36 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-23 16:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-25 6:45 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-21 20:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 7:38 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-21 8:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 11:09 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-21 16:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-22 10:38 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-05-24 22:08 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2007-05-24 22:13 ` Kok, Auke
2007-05-25 6:58 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20070618123646.GA22672@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cebbert@redhat.com \
--cc=chris@atlee.ca \
--cc=kiran@scalex86.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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.