From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: "Nysal Jan K.A." <nysal@linux.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
"Nysal Jan K.A" <nysal@linux.ibm.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>,
Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/membarrier: Fix redundant load of membarrier_state
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 11:29:38 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87frolja8d.fsf@mail.lhotse> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241007053936.833392-1-nysal@linux.ibm.com>
[To += Mathieu]
"Nysal Jan K.A." <nysal@linux.ibm.com> writes:
> From: "Nysal Jan K.A" <nysal@linux.ibm.com>
>
> On architectures where ARCH_HAS_SYNC_CORE_BEFORE_USERMODE
> is not selected, sync_core_before_usermode() is a no-op.
> In membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode() the compiler does not
> eliminate redundant branches and the load of mm->membarrier_state
> for this case as the atomic_read() cannot be optimized away.
I was wondering if this was caused by powerpc's arch_atomic_read() which
uses asm volatile.
But replacing arch_atomic_read() with READ_ONCE() makes no difference,
presumably because the compiler still can't see that the READ_ONCE() is
unnecessary (which is kind of by design).
> Here's a snippet of the code generated for finish_task_switch() on powerpc:
>
> 1b786c: ld r26,2624(r30) # mm = rq->prev_mm;
> .......
> 1b78c8: cmpdi cr7,r26,0
> 1b78cc: beq cr7,1b78e4 <finish_task_switch+0xd0>
> 1b78d0: ld r9,2312(r13) # current
> 1b78d4: ld r9,1888(r9) # current->mm
> 1b78d8: cmpd cr7,r26,r9
> 1b78dc: beq cr7,1b7a70 <finish_task_switch+0x25c>
> 1b78e0: hwsync
> 1b78e4: cmplwi cr7,r27,128
> .......
> 1b7a70: lwz r9,176(r26) # atomic_read(&mm->membarrier_state)
> 1b7a74: b 1b78e0 <finish_task_switch+0xcc>
>
> This was found while analyzing "perf c2c" reports on kernels prior
> to commit c1753fd02a00 ("mm: move mm_count into its own cache line")
> where mm_count was false sharing with membarrier_state.
So it was causing a noticable performance blip? But isn't anymore?
> There is a minor improvement in the size of finish_task_switch().
> The following are results from bloat-o-meter:
>
> GCC 7.5.0:
> ----------
> add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/1 up/down: 0/-32 (-32)
> Function old new delta
> finish_task_switch 884 852 -32
>
> GCC 12.2.1:
> -----------
> add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/1 up/down: 0/-32 (-32)
> Function old new delta
> finish_task_switch.isra 852 820 -32
GCC 12 is a couple of years old, I assume GCC 14 behaves similarly?
> LLVM 17.0.6:
> ------------
> add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/2 up/down: 0/-36 (-36)
> Function old new delta
> rt_mutex_schedule 120 104 -16
> finish_task_switch 792 772 -20
>
> Signed-off-by: Nysal Jan K.A <nysal@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> include/linux/sched/mm.h | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/mm.h b/include/linux/sched/mm.h
> index 07bb8d4181d7..042e60ab853a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/mm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/mm.h
> @@ -540,6 +540,8 @@ enum {
>
> static inline void membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode(struct mm_struct *mm)
> {
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYNC_CORE_BEFORE_USERMODE))
> + return;
> if (current->mm != mm)
> return;
> if (likely(!(atomic_read(&mm->membarrier_state) &
The other option would be to have a completely separate stub, eg:
#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYNC_CORE_BEFORE_USERMODE
static inline void membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode(struct mm_struct *mm)
{
if (current->mm != mm)
return;
if (likely(!(atomic_read(&mm->membarrier_state) &
MEMBARRIER_STATE_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED_SYNC_CORE)))
return;
sync_core_before_usermode();
}
#else
static inline void membarrier_mm_sync_core_before_usermode(struct mm_struct *mm) { }
#endif
Not sure what folks prefer.
In either case I think it's probably worth a short comment explaining
why it's worth the trouble (ie. that the atomic_read() prevents the
compiler from doing DCE).
cheers
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-25 0:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-07 5:39 [PATCH] sched/membarrier: Fix redundant load of membarrier_state Nysal Jan K.A.
2024-10-25 0:29 ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2024-10-25 2:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
2024-10-25 3:22 ` Segher Boessenkool
2024-10-25 12:40 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-25 18:30 ` Nysal Jan K.A.
2024-10-29 5:51 ` [PATCH v2] " Nysal Jan K.A.
2024-10-29 17:51 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-29 23:29 ` Michael Ellerman
2024-10-30 13:33 ` Segher Boessenkool
2024-11-18 9:04 ` Michal Hocko
2024-11-18 9:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-18 9:51 ` Michal Hocko
2025-01-09 8:46 ` Michal Hocko
2025-03-03 6:04 ` [PATCH v2 RESEND] " Nysal Jan K.A.
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=87frolja8d.fsf@mail.lhotse \
--to=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=nysal@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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).