From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: RFC: mutex: hung tasks on SMP platforms with asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 15:49:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120809144953.GC18486@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1208090029460.5231@xanadu.home>
Hi Nicolas,
Thanks for the replies.
On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 06:12:15AM +0100, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2012, Will Deacon wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/mutex.c b/kernel/mutex.c
> > index a307cc9..27b7887 100644
> > --- a/kernel/mutex.c
> > +++ b/kernel/mutex.c
> > @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
> > if (owner && !mutex_spin_on_owner(lock, owner))
> > break;
> >
> > - if (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->count, 1, 0) == 1) {
> > + if (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->count, 1, -1) == 1) {
> > lock_acquired(&lock->dep_map, ip);
> > mutex_set_owner(lock);
> > preempt_enable();
> >
> >
> > All comments welcome.
>
> Well... after thinking about this for a while, I came to the conclusion
> that the mutex_spin_on_owner code is indeed breaking the contract
> between the xchg lock fast path and the slow path. The xchg fast path
> will always set the count to 0 and rely on the slow path to restore a
> possible pre-existing negative count. So the above change would be
> needed for correctness in the xchg case, even if it always forces the
> unlock into the slow path.
Great, so we agree on that.
> As I mentioned previously, we don't want to force the slow path in all
> cases though. The atomic decrement based fast path doesn't need that,
> so I'd suggest this fix instead:
One minor typo and a suggested alternative below...
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h b/include/asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h
> index 580a6d35c7..60964844c8 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h
> @@ -108,4 +108,6 @@ __mutex_fastpath_trylock(atomic_t *count, int (*fail_fn)(atomic_t *))
> return prev;
> }
>
> +#define __MUTEX_XCHG_FAST_PATH
> +
> #endif
> diff --git a/kernel/mutex.c b/kernel/mutex.c
> index a307cc9c95..c6a26a4f1c 100644
> --- a/kernel/mutex.c
> +++ b/kernel/mutex.c
> @@ -161,6 +161,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
>
> for (;;) {
> struct task_struct *owner;
> + int locked_val;
>
> /*
> * If there's an owner, wait for it to either
> @@ -170,7 +171,19 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
> if (owner && !mutex_spin_on_owner(lock, owner))
> break;
>
> - if (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->count, 1, 0) == 1) {
> +#ifdef __MUTEX_XCHG_FAST_PATH
> + /*
> + * The fast path based on xchg sets a transient 0 count,
> + * relying on the slow path to restore a possible
> + * pre-existing contended count. Without checking the
> + * waiters' list we must presume possible contension here.
s/contension/contention/
> + */
> + locked_val = -1;
> +#else
> + locked_val = 0;
> +#endif
> +
> + if (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->count, 1, locked_val) == 1) {
> lock_acquired(&lock->dep_map, ip);
> mutex_set_owner(lock);
> preempt_enable();
>
> That would be needed for the stable tree as well.
>
> A further cleanup could remove all definitions of
> __mutex_slowpath_needs_to_unlock() given that they're all set to 1
> except for the xchg fast path, in which case __MUTEX_XCHG_FAST_PATH
> could be reused instead.
I think we could actually fix this entirely in mutex-xchg.h by doing
something in fastpath_lock similar to what we do for trylock:
diff --git a/include/asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h b/include/asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h
index 580a6d3..c082e99 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h
@@ -25,8 +25,19 @@
static inline void
__mutex_fastpath_lock(atomic_t *count, void (*fail_fn)(atomic_t *))
{
- if (unlikely(atomic_xchg(count, 0) != 1))
- fail_fn(count);
+ int prev = atomic_xchg(count, 0);
+
+ if (unlikely(prev != 1)) {
+ if (prev < 0)
+ /*
+ * The lock was contended, so we need to restore
+ * its original state to ensure that any waiting
+ * tasks are woken up by the unlock slow path.
+ */
+ prev = atomic_xchg(count, prev);
+ if (prev != 1)
+ fail_fn(count);
+ }
}
/**
What do you reckon?
> Of course that might tilt the balance towards using mutex-dec.h on ARM
> v6 and above instead of mutex-xchg.h. But that is an orthogonal issue,
> and that doesn't remove the need for fixing the xchg based case for
> correctness.
I'll do some hackbench runs against mutex-dec once we've decided on the final
xchg code. If it's faster, I'll submit a patch for ARM.
Cheers,
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-09 14:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-07 11:56 RFC: mutex: hung tasks on SMP platforms with asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h Will Deacon
2012-08-07 13:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-08-07 14:04 ` Will Deacon
2012-08-07 17:14 ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-08-07 17:33 ` Will Deacon
2012-08-07 17:38 ` Will Deacon
2012-08-07 18:28 ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-08-09 5:12 ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-08-09 14:49 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2012-08-09 16:17 ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-08-09 16:57 ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-08-09 17:50 ` Will Deacon
2012-08-09 18:09 ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-08-09 18:17 ` Will Deacon
2012-08-09 20:05 ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-08-13 8:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-08-13 9:13 ` Will Deacon
2012-08-13 13:35 ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-08-13 14:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-08-13 14:11 ` Will Deacon
2012-08-13 14:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20120809144953.GC18486@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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).