All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephan Diestelhorst <stephan.diestelhorst@amd.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
	"xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 00/10] [PATCH RFC V2] Paravirtualized ticketlocks
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 16:04:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2707952.s3VYcmPHUN@chlor> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwm7ESNfrHhEHrAKcjcPUq8YxtuEkJd5PzAekYo2dMYNw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wednesday 28 September 2011, 14:49:56 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Stephan Diestelhorst
> <stephan.diestelhorst@amd.com> wrote:
> >
> > I must have missed the part when this turned into the propose-the-
> > craziest-way-that-this-still-works.contest :)
> 
> So doing it just with the "lock addb" probably works fine, but I have
> to say that I personally shudder at the "surround the locked addb by
> reads from the word, in order to approximate an atomic read of the
> upper bits".
> 
> Because what you get is not really an "atomic read of the upper bits",
> it's a "ok, we'll get the worst case of somebody modifying the upper
> bits at the same time".
> 
> Which certainly should *work*, but from a conceptual standpoint, isn't
> it just *much* nicer to say "we actually know *exactly* what the upper
> bits were".

Well, we really do NOT want atomicity here. What we really rather want
is sequentiality: free the lock, make the update visible, and THEN
check if someone has gone sleeping on it.

Atomicity only conveniently enforces that the three do not happen in a
different order (with the store becoming visible after the checking
load).

This does not have to be atomic, since spurious wakeups are not a
problem, in particular not with the FIFO-ness of ticket locks.

For that the fence, additional atomic etc. would be IMHO much cleaner
than the crazy overflow logic.

> But I don't care all *that* deeply. I do agree that the xaddw trick is
> pretty tricky. I just happen to think that it's actually *less* tricky
> than "read the upper bits separately and depend on subtle ordering
> issues with another writer that happens at the same time on another
> CPU".

Fair enough :)

Stephan
-- 
Stephan Diestelhorst, AMD Operating System Research Center
stephan.diestelhorst@amd.com
Tel. +49 (0)351 448 356 719

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24
85609 Aschheim
Germany

Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alberto Bozzo
Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632, WEEE-Reg-Nr: DE 12919551



  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-10-06 14:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-15  0:31 [PATCH 00/10] [PATCH RFC V2] Paravirtualized ticketlocks Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-15  0:31 ` [PATCH 01/10] x86/ticketlocks: remove obsolete comment Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-15  0:31 ` [PATCH 02/10] x86/spinlocks: replace pv spinlocks with pv ticketlocks Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-15  0:31 ` [PATCH 03/10] x86/ticketlock: don't inline _spin_unlock when using paravirt spinlocks Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-15  0:31 ` [PATCH 04/10] x86/ticketlock: collapse a layer of functions Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-15  0:31 ` [PATCH 05/10] xen/pvticketlock: Xen implementation for PV ticket locks Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-15  0:31 ` [PATCH 06/10] x86/pvticketlock: use callee-save for lock_spinning Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-15  0:31 ` [PATCH 07/10] x86/ticketlocks: when paravirtualizing ticket locks, increment by 2 Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-15  0:31   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-15  0:31 ` [PATCH 08/10] x86/ticketlock: add slowpath logic Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-15  0:31 ` [PATCH 09/10] xen/pvticketlock: allow interrupts to be enabled while blocking Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-15  0:31 ` [PATCH 10/10] xen: enable PV ticketlocks on HVM Xen Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-27  9:34 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 00/10] [PATCH RFC V2] Paravirtualized ticketlocks Stephan Diestelhorst
2011-09-27  9:34   ` Stephan Diestelhorst
2011-09-27  9:34   ` Stephan Diestelhorst
2011-09-27 16:44   ` [Xen-devel] " Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-27 16:44     ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-28 13:58     ` [Xen-devel] " Stephan Diestelhorst
2011-09-28 16:44       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-28 18:13         ` Stephan Diestelhorst
2011-09-28 15:38     ` Linus Torvalds
2011-09-28 15:55       ` Jan Beulich
2011-09-28 15:55         ` Jan Beulich
2011-09-28 16:10         ` Linus Torvalds
2011-09-28 16:47           ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-28 17:22             ` Linus Torvalds
2011-09-28 17:24               ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-09-28 17:50                 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-28 18:08                   ` Stephan Diestelhorst
2011-09-28 18:27                     ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-09-28 18:49                     ` Linus Torvalds
2011-09-28 19:06                       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-06 14:04                       ` Stephan Diestelhorst [this message]
2011-10-06 17:40                         ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-06 18:09                           ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-10  7:32                             ` Ingo Molnar
2011-10-10 19:51                               ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-10 11:00                           ` Stephan Diestelhorst
2011-10-10 11:00                             ` Stephan Diestelhorst
2011-10-10 14:01                             ` Stephan Diestelhorst
2011-10-10 14:01                               ` Stephan Diestelhorst
2011-10-10 19:44                               ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge

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=2707952.s3VYcmPHUN@chlor \
    --to=stephan.diestelhorst@amd.com \
    --cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com \
    --cc=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=npiggin@kernel.dk \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
    /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.