From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: cebbert@redhat.com, chris@atlee.ca, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, kiran@scalex86.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] long freezes on thinkpad t60
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:38:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070618093848.GA6880@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070618091832.GA1860@elte.hu>
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> > > > > This change causes the memory access of the "easy" spin-loop
> > > > > portion to be more agressive: after the REP; NOP we'd not do
> > > > > the 'easy-loop' with a simple CMPB, but we'd re-attempt the
> > > > > atomic op.
> > > >
> > > > It looks as if this is going to overflow of the lock counter,
> > > > no?
> > >
> > > hm, what do you mean? There's no lock counter.
> >
> > I mean, the repeated calls to decb will pretty soon make lock->slock
> > wrap around.
>
> ugh, indeed, bad thinko on my part. I'll rework this.
how about the patch below? Boot-tested on 32-bit. As a side-effect this
change also removes the 255 CPUs limit from the 32-bit kernel.
Ingo
------------------------->
Subject: [patch] x86: fix spin-loop starvation bug
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Miklos Szeredi reported very long pauses (several seconds, sometimes
more) on his T60 (with a Core2Duo) which he managed to track down to
wait_task_inactive()'s open-coded busy-loop. He observed that an
interrupt on one core tries to acquire the runqueue-lock but does not
succeed in doing so for a very long time - while wait_task_inactive() on
the other core loops waiting for the first core to deschedule a task
(which it wont do while spinning in an interrupt handler).
The problem is: both the spin_lock() code and the wait_task_inactive()
loop uses cpu_relax()/rep_nop(), so in theory the CPU should have
guaranteed MESI-fairness to the two cores - but that didnt happen: one
of the cores was able to monopolize the cacheline that holds the
runqueue lock, for extended periods of time.
This patch changes the spin-loop to assert an atomic op after every REP
NOP instance - this will cause the CPU to express its "MESI interest" in
that cacheline after every REP NOP.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
---
include/asm-i386/spinlock.h | 27 ++++++++++-----------------
include/asm-x86_64/spinlock.h | 33 ++++++++++++++++-----------------
2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
Index: linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q/include/asm-i386/spinlock.h
===================================================================
--- linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q.orig/include/asm-i386/spinlock.h
+++ linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q/include/asm-i386/spinlock.h
@@ -35,15 +35,12 @@ static inline int __raw_spin_is_locked(r
static inline void __raw_spin_lock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
asm volatile("\n1:\t"
- LOCK_PREFIX " ; decb %0\n\t"
- "jns 3f\n"
- "2:\t"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpb $0,%0\n\t"
- "jle 2b\n\t"
+ LOCK_PREFIX " ; btrl %[zero], %[slock]\n\t"
+ "jc 3f\n"
+ "rep; nop\n\t"
"jmp 1b\n"
"3:\n\t"
- : "+m" (lock->slock) : : "memory");
+ : [slock] "+m" (lock->slock) : [zero] "Ir" (0) : "memory");
}
/*
@@ -59,27 +56,23 @@ static inline void __raw_spin_lock_flags
{
asm volatile(
"\n1:\t"
- LOCK_PREFIX " ; decb %[slock]\n\t"
+ LOCK_PREFIX " ; btrl %[zero], %[slock]\n\t"
"jns 5f\n"
"2:\t"
"testl $0x200, %[flags]\n\t"
"jz 4f\n\t"
STI_STRING "\n"
- "3:\t"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpb $0, %[slock]\n\t"
- "jle 3b\n\t"
+ "rep; nop\n\t"
CLI_STRING "\n\t"
"jmp 1b\n"
"4:\t"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpb $0, %[slock]\n\t"
- "jg 1b\n\t"
+ "rep; nop\n\t"
"jmp 4b\n"
"5:\n\t"
: [slock] "+m" (lock->slock)
- : [flags] "r" (flags)
- CLI_STI_INPUT_ARGS
+ : [zero] "Ir" (0),
+ [flags] "r" (flags)
+ CLI_STI_INPUT_ARGS
: "memory" CLI_STI_CLOBBERS);
}
#endif
Index: linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q/include/asm-x86_64/spinlock.h
===================================================================
--- linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q.orig/include/asm-x86_64/spinlock.h
+++ linux-cfs-2.6.22-rc5.q/include/asm-x86_64/spinlock.h
@@ -26,14 +26,15 @@ static inline void __raw_spin_lock(raw_s
{
asm volatile(
"\n1:\t"
- LOCK_PREFIX " ; decl %0\n\t"
+ LOCK_PREFIX " ; btrl %[zero], %[slock]\n\t"
"jns 2f\n"
- "3:\n"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpl $0,%0\n\t"
- "jle 3b\n\t"
+ "rep; nop\n\t"
"jmp 1b\n"
- "2:\t" : "=m" (lock->slock) : : "memory");
+ "2:\t"
+ : [slock] "+m" (lock->slock)
+ : [zero] "Ir" (0)
+ : "memory"
+ );
}
/*
@@ -44,24 +45,22 @@ static inline void __raw_spin_lock_flags
{
asm volatile(
"\n1:\t"
- LOCK_PREFIX " ; decl %0\n\t"
+ LOCK_PREFIX " ; btrl %[zero], %[slock]\n\t"
"jns 5f\n"
- "testl $0x200, %1\n\t" /* interrupts were disabled? */
+ "testl $0x200, %[flags]\n\t" /* were interrupts disabled? */
"jz 4f\n\t"
"sti\n"
- "3:\t"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpl $0, %0\n\t"
- "jle 3b\n\t"
+ "rep; nop\n\t"
"cli\n\t"
"jmp 1b\n"
- "4:\t"
- "rep;nop\n\t"
- "cmpl $0, %0\n\t"
- "jg 1b\n\t"
+ "rep; nop\n\t"
"jmp 4b\n"
"5:\n\t"
- : "+m" (lock->slock) : "r" ((unsigned)flags) : "memory");
+ : [slock] "+m" (lock->slock)
+ : [zero] "Ir" (0),
+ [flags] "r" ((unsigned)flags)
+ : "memory"
+ );
}
#endif
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-18 9:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 88+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-24 12:04 [BUG] long freezes on thinkpad t60 Miklos Szeredi
2007-05-24 12:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-24 14:03 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-05-24 14:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-24 14:28 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-05-24 14:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-24 14:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-24 17:09 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-05-24 21:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-25 9:51 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-14 16:04 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-15 21:25 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-06-16 10:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-17 21:46 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 6:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 7:24 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 8:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 8:20 ` Andrew Morton
2007-06-19 4:22 ` Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2007-06-18 8:25 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 8:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 8:34 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 9:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 9:38 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-06-18 9:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 10:18 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 12:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 13:10 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 16:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-18 17:41 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-18 17:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-18 18:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 18:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-18 18:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-20 9:36 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-20 17:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 7:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 15:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 16:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 16:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 16:44 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-06-21 17:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 18:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-06-21 18:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 19:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 20:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 20:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 21:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:42 ` [patch] spinlock debug: make looping nicer Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 21:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-22 7:00 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-21 20:36 ` [BUG] long freezes on thinkpad t60 Eric Dumazet
2007-06-21 19:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 20:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-26 8:42 ` Nick Piggin
2007-06-26 10:56 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-26 17:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-27 5:23 ` Nick Piggin
2007-06-27 6:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-27 6:20 ` Nick Piggin
2007-06-27 19:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-27 20:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-27 20:17 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-06-27 22:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-27 23:30 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-06-28 0:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-28 3:03 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-07-02 7:06 ` Nick Piggin
2007-06-21 20:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-22 8:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-23 10:36 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-06-23 16:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-25 6:45 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-21 20:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 20:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-21 7:38 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-21 8:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-21 11:09 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-06-21 16:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-22 10:38 ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-05-24 22:08 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2007-05-24 22:13 ` Kok, Auke
2007-05-25 6:58 ` 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=20070618093848.GA6880@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cebbert@redhat.com \
--cc=chris@atlee.ca \
--cc=kiran@scalex86.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--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).