From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>,
Jes Sorensen <jes@trained-monkey.org>,
Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: [patch 05/11] mutex subsystem, add include/asm-arm/mutex.h
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 17:17:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051223161729.GF26830@elte.hu> (raw)
add the ARM version of mutex.h, which is optimized in assembly for
ARMv6, and uses the xchg implementation on pre-ARMv6.
From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
----
include/asm-arm/mutex.h | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 102 insertions(+)
Index: linux/include/asm-arm/mutex.h
===================================================================
--- /dev/null
+++ linux/include/asm-arm/mutex.h
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+/*
+ * include/asm-arm/mutex.h
+ *
+ * ARM optimized mutex locking primitives
+ *
+ * Please look into asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h for a formal definition.
+ */
+#ifndef _ASM_MUTEX_H
+#define _ASM_MUTEX_H
+
+#if __LINUX_ARM_ARCH__ < 6
+/* On pre-ARMv6 hardware the swp based implementation is the most efficient. */
+# include <asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h>
+#else
+
+/*
+ * Attempting to lock a mutex on ARMv6+ can be done with a bastardized
+ * atomic decrement (it is not a reliable atomic decrement but it satisfies
+ * the defined semantics for our purpose, while being smaller and faster
+ * than a real atomic decrement or atomic swap. The idea is to attempt
+ * decrementing the lock value only once. If once decremented it isn't zero,
+ * or if its store-back fails due to a dispute on the exclusive store, we
+ * simply bail out immediately through the slow path where the lock will be
+ * reattempted until it succeeds.
+ */
+#define __mutex_fastpath_lock(count, fail_fn) \
+do { \
+ /* type-check the function too: */ \
+ void fastcall (*__tmp)(atomic_t *) = fail_fn; \
+ int __ex_flag, __res; \
+ \
+ (void)__tmp; \
+ typecheck(atomic_t *, count); \
+ \
+ __asm__ ( \
+ "ldrex %0, [%2]\n\t" \
+ "sub %0, %0, #1\n\t" \
+ "strex %1, %0, [%2]" \
+ : "=&r" (__res), "=&r" (__ex_flag) \
+ : "r" (&(count)->counter) \
+ : "cc","memory" ); \
+ __res |= __ex_flag; \
+ if (unlikely(__res != 0)) \
+ fail_fn(count); \
+} while (0)
+
+#define __mutex_fastpath_lock_retval(count, fail_fn) \
+({ \
+ /* type-check the function too: */ \
+ int fastcall (*__tmp)(atomic_t *) = fail_fn; \
+ int __ex_flag, __res; \
+ \
+ (void)__tmp; \
+ typecheck(atomic_t *, count); \
+ \
+ __asm__ ( \
+ "ldrex %0, [%2]\n\t" \
+ "sub %0, %0, #1\n\t" \
+ "strex %1, %0, [%2]" \
+ : "=&r" (__res), "=&r" (__ex_flag) \
+ : "r" (&(count)->counter) \
+ : "cc","memory" ); \
+ __res |= __ex_flag; \
+ if (unlikely(__res != 0)) \
+ __res = fail_fn(count); \
+ __res; \
+})
+
+/*
+ * Same trick is used for the unlock fast path. However the original value,
+ * rather than the result, is used to test for success in order to have
+ * better generated assembly.
+ */
+#define __mutex_fastpath_unlock(count, fail_fn) \
+do { \
+ /* type-check the function too: */ \
+ void fastcall (*__tmp)(atomic_t *) = fail_fn; \
+ int __ex_flag, __res, __orig; \
+ \
+ (void)__tmp; \
+ typecheck(atomic_t *, count); \
+ \
+ __asm__ ( \
+ "ldrex %0, [%3]\n\t" \
+ "add %1, %0, #1\n\t" \
+ "strex %2, %1, [%3]" \
+ : "=&r" (__orig), "=&r" (__res), "=&r" (__ex_flag) \
+ : "r" (&(count)->counter) \
+ : "cc","memory" ); \
+ __orig |= __ex_flag; \
+ if (unlikely(__orig != 0)) \
+ fail_fn(count); \
+} while (0)
+
+/*
+ * If the unlock was done on a contended lock, or if the unlock simply fails
+ * then the mutex remains locked.
+ */
+#define __mutex_slowpath_needs_to_unlock() 1
+
+#endif
+#endif
next reply other threads:[~2005-12-23 16:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-23 16:17 Ingo Molnar [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-12-27 14:15 [patch 05/11] mutex subsystem, add include/asm-arm/mutex.h Ingo Molnar
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=20051223161729.GF26830@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jes@trained-monkey.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nico@cam.org \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=zwane@arm.linux.org.uk \
/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