From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
"linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>,
Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] locking/qrwlock: Don't contend with readers when setting _QW_WAITING
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 21:33:56 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55822004.8060605@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150616180227.GA2401@arm.com>
On 06/16/2015 02:02 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 11:24:03PM +0100, Waiman Long wrote:
>> The current cmpxchg() loop in setting the _QW_WAITING flag for writers
>> in queue_write_lock_slowpath() will contend with incoming readers
>> causing possibly extra cmpxchg() operations that are wasteful. This
>> patch changes the code to do a byte cmpxchg() to eliminate contention
>> with new readers.
>>
>> A multithreaded microbenchmark running 5M read_lock/write_lock loop
>> on a 8-socket 80-core Westmere-EX machine running 4.0 based kernel
>> with the qspinlock patch have the following execution times (in ms)
>> with and without the patch:
>>
>> With R:W ratio = 5:1
>>
>> Threads w/o patch with patch % change
>> ------- --------- ---------- --------
>> 2 990 895 -9.6%
>> 3 2136 1912 -10.5%
>> 4 3166 2830 -10.6%
>> 5 3953 3629 -8.2%
>> 6 4628 4405 -4.8%
>> 7 5344 5197 -2.8%
>> 8 6065 6004 -1.0%
>> 9 6826 6811 -0.2%
>> 10 7599 7599 0.0%
>> 15 9757 9766 +0.1%
>> 20 13767 13817 +0.4%
>>
>> With small number of contending threads, this patch can improve
>> locking performance by up to 10%. With more contending threads,
>> however, the gain diminishes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long<Waiman.Long@hp.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/locking/qrwlock.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>> 1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c b/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
>> index d7d7557..559198a 100644
>> --- a/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
>> +++ b/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
>> @@ -22,6 +22,26 @@
>> #include<linux/hardirq.h>
>> #include<asm/qrwlock.h>
>>
>> +/*
>> + * This internal data structure is used for optimizing access to some of
>> + * the subfields within the atomic_t cnts.
>> + */
>> +struct __qrwlock {
>> + union {
>> + atomic_t cnts;
>> + struct {
>> +#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
>> + u8 wmode; /* Writer mode */
>> + u8 rcnts[3]; /* Reader counts */
>> +#else
>> + u8 rcnts[3]; /* Reader counts */
>> + u8 wmode; /* Writer mode */
>> +#endif
>> + };
>> + };
>> + arch_spinlock_t lock;
>> +};
>> +
>> /**
>> * rspin_until_writer_unlock - inc reader count& spin until writer is gone
>> * @lock : Pointer to queue rwlock structure
>> @@ -109,10 +129,10 @@ void queue_write_lock_slowpath(struct qrwlock *lock)
>> * or wait for a previous writer to go away.
>> */
>> for (;;) {
>> - cnts = atomic_read(&lock->cnts);
>> - if (!(cnts& _QW_WMASK)&&
>> - (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->cnts, cnts,
>> - cnts | _QW_WAITING) == cnts))
>> + struct __qrwlock *l = (struct __qrwlock *)lock;
>> +
>> + if (!READ_ONCE(l->wmode)&&
>> + (cmpxchg(&l->wmode, 0, _QW_WAITING) == 0))
>> break;
> Maybe you could also update the x86 implementation of queue_write_unlock
> to write the wmode field instead of casting to u8 *?
>
> Will
The queue_write_unlock() function is in the header file. I don't want to
expose the internal structure to other files.
Cheers,
Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-18 1:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-15 22:24 [PATCH v3 0/2] locking/qrwlock: More optimizations in qrwlock Waiman Long
2015-06-15 22:24 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] locking/qrwlock: Better optimization for interrupt context readers Waiman Long
2015-06-16 12:17 ` Will Deacon
2015-06-18 1:30 ` Waiman Long
2015-06-15 22:24 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] locking/qrwlock: Don't contend with readers when setting _QW_WAITING Waiman Long
2015-06-16 18:02 ` Will Deacon
2015-06-18 1:33 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2015-06-18 12:40 ` Will Deacon
2015-06-18 22:14 ` 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=55822004.8060605@hp.com \
--to=waiman.long@hp.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=doug.hatch@hp.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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.