From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] locking/rwsem: Optimize down_read_trylock() Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 14:25:37 +0100 Message-ID: <20190212132537.GL32534@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1549913486-16799-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> <1549913486-16799-3-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> <20190212132404.GI32494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190212132404.GI32494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Waiman Long Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, Davidlohr Bueso , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Tim Chen , Arnd Bergmann , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Will Deacon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Andrew Morton , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 02:24:04PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:31:26PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: > > Modify __down_read_trylock() to make it generate slightly better code > > (smaller and maybe a tiny bit faster). > > > > Before this patch, down_read_trylock: > > > > 0x0000000000000000 <+0>: callq 0x5 > > 0x0000000000000005 <+5>: jmp 0x18 > > 0x0000000000000007 <+7>: lea 0x1(%rdx),%rcx > > 0x000000000000000b <+11>: mov %rdx,%rax > > 0x000000000000000e <+14>: lock cmpxchg %rcx,(%rdi) > > 0x0000000000000013 <+19>: cmp %rax,%rdx > > 0x0000000000000016 <+22>: je 0x23 > > 0x0000000000000018 <+24>: mov (%rdi),%rdx > > 0x000000000000001b <+27>: test %rdx,%rdx > > 0x000000000000001e <+30>: jns 0x7 > > 0x0000000000000020 <+32>: xor %eax,%eax > > 0x0000000000000022 <+34>: retq > > 0x0000000000000023 <+35>: mov %gs:0x0,%rax > > 0x000000000000002c <+44>: or $0x3,%rax > > 0x0000000000000030 <+48>: mov %rax,0x20(%rdi) > > 0x0000000000000034 <+52>: mov $0x1,%eax > > 0x0000000000000039 <+57>: retq > > > > After patch, down_read_trylock: > > > > 0x0000000000000000 <+0>: callq 0x5 > > 0x0000000000000005 <+5>: mov (%rdi),%rax > > 0x0000000000000008 <+8>: test %rax,%rax > > 0x000000000000000b <+11>: js 0x2f > > 0x000000000000000d <+13>: lea 0x1(%rax),%rdx > > 0x0000000000000011 <+17>: lock cmpxchg %rdx,(%rdi) > > 0x0000000000000016 <+22>: jne 0x8 > > 0x0000000000000018 <+24>: mov %gs:0x0,%rax > > 0x0000000000000021 <+33>: or $0x3,%rax > > 0x0000000000000025 <+37>: mov %rax,0x20(%rdi) > > 0x0000000000000029 <+41>: mov $0x1,%eax > > 0x000000000000002e <+46>: retq > > 0x000000000000002f <+47>: xor %eax,%eax > > 0x0000000000000031 <+49>: retq > > > > By using a rwsem microbenchmark, the down_read_trylock() rate on a > > x86-64 system before and after the patch were: > > > > Before Patch After Patch > > # of Threads rlock rlock > > ------------ ----- ----- > > 1 27,787 28,259 > > 2 8,359 9,234 > > From 1/2: > > 1 29,201 30,143 29,458 28,615 30,172 29,201 > 2 6,807 13,299 1,171 7,725 15,025 1,804 Argh, fat fingered and send before I was done typing. What I wanted to say was; those rlock numbers don't match up. What gives? The before _this_ patch number of 27k787 should be the same as the after first patch number of 30k172. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:57380 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726550AbfBLNZx (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2019 08:25:53 -0500 Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 14:25:37 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] locking/rwsem: Optimize down_read_trylock() Message-ID: <20190212132537.GL32534@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1549913486-16799-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> <1549913486-16799-3-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> <20190212132404.GI32494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190212132404.GI32494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Waiman Long Cc: Ingo Molnar , Will Deacon , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , Davidlohr Bueso , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Tim Chen Message-ID: <20190212132537.9zqEo-KSEnkye11Q8mGsWcwpzh5qRzA13G8s1B1Ky0k@z> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 02:24:04PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:31:26PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: > > Modify __down_read_trylock() to make it generate slightly better code > > (smaller and maybe a tiny bit faster). > > > > Before this patch, down_read_trylock: > > > > 0x0000000000000000 <+0>: callq 0x5 > > 0x0000000000000005 <+5>: jmp 0x18 > > 0x0000000000000007 <+7>: lea 0x1(%rdx),%rcx > > 0x000000000000000b <+11>: mov %rdx,%rax > > 0x000000000000000e <+14>: lock cmpxchg %rcx,(%rdi) > > 0x0000000000000013 <+19>: cmp %rax,%rdx > > 0x0000000000000016 <+22>: je 0x23 > > 0x0000000000000018 <+24>: mov (%rdi),%rdx > > 0x000000000000001b <+27>: test %rdx,%rdx > > 0x000000000000001e <+30>: jns 0x7 > > 0x0000000000000020 <+32>: xor %eax,%eax > > 0x0000000000000022 <+34>: retq > > 0x0000000000000023 <+35>: mov %gs:0x0,%rax > > 0x000000000000002c <+44>: or $0x3,%rax > > 0x0000000000000030 <+48>: mov %rax,0x20(%rdi) > > 0x0000000000000034 <+52>: mov $0x1,%eax > > 0x0000000000000039 <+57>: retq > > > > After patch, down_read_trylock: > > > > 0x0000000000000000 <+0>: callq 0x5 > > 0x0000000000000005 <+5>: mov (%rdi),%rax > > 0x0000000000000008 <+8>: test %rax,%rax > > 0x000000000000000b <+11>: js 0x2f > > 0x000000000000000d <+13>: lea 0x1(%rax),%rdx > > 0x0000000000000011 <+17>: lock cmpxchg %rdx,(%rdi) > > 0x0000000000000016 <+22>: jne 0x8 > > 0x0000000000000018 <+24>: mov %gs:0x0,%rax > > 0x0000000000000021 <+33>: or $0x3,%rax > > 0x0000000000000025 <+37>: mov %rax,0x20(%rdi) > > 0x0000000000000029 <+41>: mov $0x1,%eax > > 0x000000000000002e <+46>: retq > > 0x000000000000002f <+47>: xor %eax,%eax > > 0x0000000000000031 <+49>: retq > > > > By using a rwsem microbenchmark, the down_read_trylock() rate on a > > x86-64 system before and after the patch were: > > > > Before Patch After Patch > > # of Threads rlock rlock > > ------------ ----- ----- > > 1 27,787 28,259 > > 2 8,359 9,234 > > From 1/2: > > 1 29,201 30,143 29,458 28,615 30,172 29,201 > 2 6,807 13,299 1,171 7,725 15,025 1,804 Argh, fat fingered and send before I was done typing. What I wanted to say was; those rlock numbers don't match up. What gives? The before _this_ patch number of 27k787 should be the same as the after first patch number of 30k172.