From: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
To: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] rwsem: wake all readers when first waiter is a reader
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 16:36:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1363034207.27803.8.camel@thor.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1362612111-28673-12-git-send-email-walken@google.com>
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 15:21 -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> + retry_reader_grants:
> + oldcount = rwsem_atomic_update(adjustment, sem) - adjustment;
> + if (unlikely(oldcount < RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)) {
> + /* A writer stole the lock. Undo our reader grants. */
> + if (rwsem_atomic_update(-adjustment, sem) < RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)
> + goto out;
> + /* The writer left. Retry waking readers. */
> + goto retry_reader_grants;
> + }
This can be reduced to single looping cmpxchg in the grant reversal
path; then if reversing the grant fails, the count can simply be
re-tested for grant success, rather than trying to atomically re-grant.
For example, with a helper function, rwsem_cmpxchg():
static inline int rwsem_cmpxchg(long *old, long new, struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
long tmp = *old;
*old = cmpxchg(&sem->count, *old, new);
return tmp == *old;
}
... then above becomes ...
count = rwsem_atomic_update(adjustment, sem);
do {
if (count - adjustment >= RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)
break;
if (rwsem_cmpxchg(&count, count - adjustment, sem))
goto out; /* or simply return sem */
} while (1);
< wake up readers >
Also, this series and the original rwsem can mistakenly sleep reader(s)
when the lock is transitioned from writer-owned to waiting readers-owned
with no waiting writers. For example,
CPU 0 | CPU 1
|
| down_write()
... CPU 1 has the write lock for the semaphore.
Meanwhile, 1 or more down_read(s) are attempted and fail;
these are put on the wait list. Then ...
down_read() | up_write()
local = atomic_update(+read_bias) |
local <= 0? | local = atomic_update(-write_bias)
if (true) | local < 0?
down_read_failed() | if (true)
| wake()
| grab wait_lock
wait for wait_lock | wake all readers
| release wait_lock
... At this point, sem->count > 0 and the wait list is empty,
but down_read_failed() will sleep the reader.
In this case, CPU 0 has observed the sem count with the write lock (and
the other waiters) and so is detoured to down_read_failed(). But if
CPU 0 can't grab the wait_lock before the up_write() does (via
rwsem_wake()), then down_read_failed() will wake no one and sleep the
reader.
Unfortunately, this means readers and writers which observe the sem
count after the adjustment is committed by CPU 0 in down_read_failed()
will sleep as well, until the sem count returns to 0.
I think the best solution would be to preserve the observed count when
down_read() fails and pass it to rwsem_down_read_failed() -- of course,
this is also the most disruptive approach as it changes the per-arch
interface (the attached patch does not include the arch changes). The
other alternative is to go through the __rwsem_do_wake() path.
Regards,
Peter Hurley
--- >% ---
Subject: [PATCH] rwsem: Early-out tardy readers
Signed-off-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
---
lib/rwsem.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/rwsem.c b/lib/rwsem.c
index f9a5705..8eb2cdf 100644
--- a/lib/rwsem.c
+++ b/lib/rwsem.c
@@ -118,12 +118,11 @@ __rwsem_do_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem, bool wakewrite)
/*
* wait for the read lock to be granted
*/
-struct rw_semaphore __sched *rwsem_down_read_failed(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
+struct rw_semaphore __sched *rwsem_down_read_failed(struct rw_semaphore *sem, long count)
{
signed long adjustment = -RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS;
struct rwsem_waiter waiter;
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
- signed long count;
/* set up my own style of waitqueue */
waiter.task = tsk;
@@ -131,6 +130,20 @@ struct rw_semaphore __sched *rwsem_down_read_failed(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
get_task_struct(tsk);
raw_spin_lock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
+
+ /* Try to reverse the lock attempt but if the count has changed
+ * so that reversing fails, check if there are are no waiters,
+ * and early-out if not */
+ do {
+ if (rwsem_cmpxchg(&count, count + adjust, sem))
+ break;
+ if (count > 0) {
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
+ put_task_struct(tsk);
+ return sem;
+ }
+ } while (1);
+
sem->wait_readers++;
if (list_empty(&sem->wait_list))
adjustment += RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS;
--
1.8.1.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-11 20:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-06 23:21 [PATCH 00/12] rwsem fast-path write lock stealing Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 01/12] rwsem: make the waiter type an enumeration rather than a bitmask Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-13 21:33 ` Rik van Riel
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 02/12] rwsem: shorter spinlocked section in rwsem_down_failed_common() Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 03/12] rwsem: move rwsem_down_failed_common code into rwsem_down_{read,write}_failed Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 04/12] rwsem: simplify rwsem_down_read_failed Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 05/12] rwsem: simplify rwsem_down_write_failed Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 06/12] rwsem: more agressive lock stealing in rwsem_down_write_failed Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 07/12] rwsem: use cmpxchg for trying to steal write lock Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 08/12] rwsem: avoid taking wait_lock in rwsem_down_write_failed Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 09/12] rwsem: skip initial trylock " Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 10/12] rwsem-spinlock: wake all readers when first waiter is a reader Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 11/12] rwsem: " Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-09 0:32 ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-09 1:20 ` Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-11 0:16 ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-11 5:17 ` Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-12 2:36 ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-12 6:43 ` Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-13 3:23 ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-13 11:03 ` Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-14 2:00 ` Peter Hurley
2013-03-19 1:17 ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-19 23:48 ` Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-11 7:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-11 20:36 ` Peter Hurley [this message]
2013-03-14 7:03 ` Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-14 11:39 ` Peter Hurley
2013-03-14 15:20 ` Michel Lespinasse
2013-03-06 23:21 ` [PATCH 12/12] x86 rwsem: avoid taking slow path when stealing write lock Michel Lespinasse
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=1363034207.27803.8.camel@thor.lan \
--to=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=walken@google.com \
--cc=yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox