From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
George Spelvin <linux@horizon.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
aswin@hp.com, Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] qrwlock: A queue read/write lock implementation
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:58:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52DE991F.1030900@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140120152129.GH31570@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 01/20/2014 10:21 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:44:03PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>> +#ifndef arch_mutex_cpu_relax
>> +# define arch_mutex_cpu_relax() cpu_relax()
>> +#endif
> Include<linux/mutex.h>
>
Will do so.
>> +#ifndef smp_load_acquire
>> +# ifdef CONFIG_X86
>> +# define smp_load_acquire(p) \
>> + ({ \
>> + typeof(*p) ___p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(*p); \
>> + barrier(); \
>> + ___p1; \
>> + })
>> +# else
>> +# define smp_load_acquire(p) \
>> + ({ \
>> + typeof(*p) ___p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(*p); \
>> + smp_mb(); \
>> + ___p1; \
>> + })
>> +# endif
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +#ifndef smp_store_release
>> +# ifdef CONFIG_X86
>> +# define smp_store_release(p, v) \
>> + do { \
>> + barrier(); \
>> + ACCESS_ONCE(*p) = v; \
>> + } while (0)
>> +# else
>> +# define smp_store_release(p, v) \
>> + do { \
>> + smp_mb(); \
>> + ACCESS_ONCE(*p) = v; \
>> + } while (0)
>> +# endif
>> +#endif
> Remove these.
Will do that.
>> +/*
>> + * If an xadd (exchange-add) macro isn't available, simulate one with
>> + * the atomic_add_return() function.
>> + */
>> +#ifdef xadd
>> +# define qrw_xadd(rw, inc) xadd(&(rw).rwc, inc)
>> +#else
>> +# define qrw_xadd(rw, inc) (u32)(atomic_add_return(inc,&(rw).rwa) - inc)
>> +#endif
> Is GCC really so stupid that you cannot always use the
> atomic_add_return()? The x86 atomic_add_return is i + xadd(), so you'll
> end up with:
>
> i + xadd() - i
>
> Surely it can just remove the two i terms?
I guess gcc should do the right thing. I will remove the macro.
>> +/**
>> + * wait_in_queue - Add to queue and wait until it is at the head
>> + * @lock: Pointer to queue rwlock structure
>> + * @node: Node pointer to be added to the queue
>> + */
>> +static inline void wait_in_queue(struct qrwlock *lock, struct qrwnode *node)
>> +{
>> + struct qrwnode *prev;
>> +
>> + node->next = NULL;
>> + node->wait = true;
>> + prev = xchg(&lock->waitq, node);
>> + if (prev) {
>> + prev->next = node;
>> + /*
>> + * Wait until the waiting flag is off
>> + */
>> + while (smp_load_acquire(&node->wait))
>> + arch_mutex_cpu_relax();
>> + }
>> +}
> Please rebase on top of the MCS lock patches such that this is gone.
I would like to keep this as long as the MCS patches have not been
merged into tip. However, I will take that out if the MCS patches are in
when I need to revise the qrwlock patches.
-Longman
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
George Spelvin <linux@horizon.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>, "" <aswin@hp.com>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/5] qrwlock: A queue read/write lock implementation
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:58:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52DE991F.1030900@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140120152129.GH31570@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 01/20/2014 10:21 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:44:03PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>> +#ifndef arch_mutex_cpu_relax
>> +# define arch_mutex_cpu_relax() cpu_relax()
>> +#endif
> Include<linux/mutex.h>
>
Will do so.
>> +#ifndef smp_load_acquire
>> +# ifdef CONFIG_X86
>> +# define smp_load_acquire(p) \
>> + ({ \
>> + typeof(*p) ___p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(*p); \
>> + barrier(); \
>> + ___p1; \
>> + })
>> +# else
>> +# define smp_load_acquire(p) \
>> + ({ \
>> + typeof(*p) ___p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(*p); \
>> + smp_mb(); \
>> + ___p1; \
>> + })
>> +# endif
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +#ifndef smp_store_release
>> +# ifdef CONFIG_X86
>> +# define smp_store_release(p, v) \
>> + do { \
>> + barrier(); \
>> + ACCESS_ONCE(*p) = v; \
>> + } while (0)
>> +# else
>> +# define smp_store_release(p, v) \
>> + do { \
>> + smp_mb(); \
>> + ACCESS_ONCE(*p) = v; \
>> + } while (0)
>> +# endif
>> +#endif
> Remove these.
Will do that.
>> +/*
>> + * If an xadd (exchange-add) macro isn't available, simulate one with
>> + * the atomic_add_return() function.
>> + */
>> +#ifdef xadd
>> +# define qrw_xadd(rw, inc) xadd(&(rw).rwc, inc)
>> +#else
>> +# define qrw_xadd(rw, inc) (u32)(atomic_add_return(inc,&(rw).rwa) - inc)
>> +#endif
> Is GCC really so stupid that you cannot always use the
> atomic_add_return()? The x86 atomic_add_return is i + xadd(), so you'll
> end up with:
>
> i + xadd() - i
>
> Surely it can just remove the two i terms?
I guess gcc should do the right thing. I will remove the macro.
>> +/**
>> + * wait_in_queue - Add to queue and wait until it is at the head
>> + * @lock: Pointer to queue rwlock structure
>> + * @node: Node pointer to be added to the queue
>> + */
>> +static inline void wait_in_queue(struct qrwlock *lock, struct qrwnode *node)
>> +{
>> + struct qrwnode *prev;
>> +
>> + node->next = NULL;
>> + node->wait = true;
>> + prev = xchg(&lock->waitq, node);
>> + if (prev) {
>> + prev->next = node;
>> + /*
>> + * Wait until the waiting flag is off
>> + */
>> + while (smp_load_acquire(&node->wait))
>> + arch_mutex_cpu_relax();
>> + }
>> +}
> Please rebase on top of the MCS lock patches such that this is gone.
I would like to keep this as long as the MCS patches have not been
merged into tip. However, I will take that out if the MCS patches are in
when I need to revise the qrwlock patches.
-Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-21 15:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-15 4:44 [PATCH v9 0/5] qrwlock: Introducing a queue read/write lock implementation Waiman Long
2014-01-15 4:44 ` [PATCH v9 1/5] qrwlock: A " Waiman Long
2014-01-20 15:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 15:58 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2014-01-21 15:58 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-15 4:44 ` [PATCH v9 2/5] qrwlock x86: Enable x86 to use queue read/write lock Waiman Long
2014-01-20 16:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-20 16:16 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-01-21 16:00 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-21 16:00 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-15 4:44 ` [PATCH v9 3/5] qrwlock, x86 - Treat all data type not bigger than long as atomic in x86 Waiman Long
2014-01-20 15:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 15:36 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-21 15:36 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-21 15:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 16:09 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-22 0:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-01-22 4:42 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-22 8:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-22 12:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-01-22 12:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-22 13:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-01-27 17:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-01-15 4:44 ` [PATCH v9 4/5] qrwlock: Use smp_store_release() in write_unlock() Waiman Long
2014-01-20 3:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-01-20 15:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-21 15:45 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-21 15:45 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-21 15:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-15 4:44 ` [PATCH v9 5/5] qrwlock: Use the mcs_spinlock helper functions for MCS queuing Waiman Long
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=52DE991F.1030900@hp.com \
--to=waiman.long@hp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=aswin@hp.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@horizon.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=walken@google.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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.