From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
To: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] percpu-rwsem: use barrier in unlock path
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:56:46 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1210181545520.32376@file.rdu.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <507F66F6.20704@cn.fujitsu.com>
This patch looks sensible.
I'd apply either this or my previous patch that adds synchronize_rcu() to
percpu_up_write.
This patch avoids the memory barrier on non-x86 cpus in percpu_up_read, so
it is faster than the previous approach.
Mikulas
On Thu, 18 Oct 2012, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> ---------------
>
> a very draft example of paired-mb()s is here:
>
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h b/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h
> index cf80f7e..84a93c0 100644
> --- a/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h
> +++ b/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h
> @@ -12,6 +12,14 @@ struct percpu_rw_semaphore {
> struct mutex mtx;
> };
>
> +#if 1
> +#define light_mb() barrier()
> +#define heavy_mb() synchronize_sched()
> +#else
> +#define light_mb() smp_mb()
> +#define heavy_mb() smp_mb();
> +#endif
> +
> static inline void percpu_down_read(struct percpu_rw_semaphore *p)
> {
> rcu_read_lock();
> @@ -24,22 +32,12 @@ static inline void percpu_down_read(struct percpu_rw_semaphore *p)
> }
> this_cpu_inc(*p->counters);
> rcu_read_unlock();
> + light_mb(); /* A, between read of p->locked and read of data, paired with D */
> }
>
> static inline void percpu_up_read(struct percpu_rw_semaphore *p)
> {
> - /*
> - * On X86, write operation in this_cpu_dec serves as a memory unlock
> - * barrier (i.e. memory accesses may be moved before the write, but
> - * no memory accesses are moved past the write).
> - * On other architectures this may not be the case, so we need smp_mb()
> - * there.
> - */
> -#if defined(CONFIG_X86) && (!defined(CONFIG_X86_PPRO_FENCE) && !defined(CONFIG_X86_OOSTORE))
> - barrier();
> -#else
> - smp_mb();
> -#endif
> + light_mb(); /* B, between read of the data and write to p->counter, paired with C */
> this_cpu_dec(*p->counters);
> }
>
> @@ -61,11 +59,12 @@ static inline void percpu_down_write(struct percpu_rw_semaphore *p)
> synchronize_rcu();
> while (__percpu_count(p->counters))
> msleep(1);
> - smp_rmb(); /* paired with smp_mb() in percpu_sem_up_read() */
> + heavy_mb(); /* C, between read of p->counter and write to data, paired with B */
> }
>
> static inline void percpu_up_write(struct percpu_rw_semaphore *p)
> {
> + heavy_mb(); /* D, between write to data and write to p->locked, paired with A */
> p->locked = false;
> mutex_unlock(&p->mtx);
> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-18 19:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.64.1210151716310.10685@file.rdu.redhat.com>
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.64.1210161924350.20581@file.rdu.redhat.com>
2012-10-17 2:23 ` [PATCH] percpu-rwsem: use barrier in unlock path Linus Torvalds
2012-10-17 5:58 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-10-17 5:58 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-10-17 15:07 ` Mikulas Patocka
2012-10-17 20:28 ` Steven Rostedt
2012-10-17 20:28 ` Steven Rostedt
2012-10-18 2:18 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-10-18 4:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2012-10-18 16:17 ` Mikulas Patocka
2012-10-18 15:32 ` Mikulas Patocka
2012-10-18 19:56 ` Mikulas Patocka [this message]
2012-10-18 16:05 ` Mikulas Patocka
2012-10-17 9:56 ` Alan Cox
2012-10-18 16:00 ` Mikulas Patocka
2012-10-19 18:48 ` Linus Torvalds
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.1210181545520.32376@file.rdu.redhat.com \
--to=mpatocka@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).