From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>, Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>,
"Norton, Scott J" <scott.norton@hp.com>,
tom.vaden@hp.com, "Chandramouleeswaran, Aswin" <aswin@hp.com>,
Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>, Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] futex: Avoid taking hb lock if nothing to wakeup
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 17:36:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131125163627.GC10022@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1311251715490.30673@ionos.tec.linutronix.de>
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 05:23:51PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2013, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > Now the question is why we queue the waiter _AFTER_ reading the user
> > > space value. The comment in the code is pretty non sensical:
> > >
> > > * On the other hand, we insert q and release the hash-bucket only
> > > * after testing *uaddr. This guarantees that futex_wait() will NOT
> > > * absorb a wakeup if *uaddr does not match the desired values
> > > * while the syscall executes.
> > >
> > > There is no reason why we cannot queue _BEFORE_ reading the user space
> > > value. We just have to dequeue in all the error handling cases, but
> > > for the fast path it does not matter at all.
> > >
> > > CPU 0 CPU 1
> > >
> > > val = *futex;
> > > futex_wait(futex, val);
> > >
> > > spin_lock(&hb->lock);
> > >
> > > plist_add(hb, self);
> > > smp_wmb();
> > >
> > > uval = *futex;
> > > *futex = newval;
> > > futex_wake();
> > >
> > > smp_rmb();
> > > if (plist_empty(hb))
> > > return;
> > > ...
> >
> > This would seem to be a nicer approach indeed, without needing the
> > extra atomics.
>
> I went through the issue with Peter and he noticed, that we need
> smp_mb() in both places. That's what we have right now with the
> spin_lock() and it is required as we need to guarantee that
>
> The waiter observes the change to the uaddr value after it added
> itself to the plist
>
> The waker observes plist not empty if the change to uaddr was made
> after the waiter checked the value.
>
>
> write(plist) | write(futex_uaddr)
> mb() | mb()
> read(futex_uaddr) | read(plist)
>
> The spin_lock mb() on the waiter side does not help here because it
> happpens before the write(plist) and not after it.
Ah, note that spin_lock() is only a smp_mb() on x86, in general its an
ACQUIRE barrier which is weaker than a full mb and will not suffice in
this case even it if were in the right place.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-25 16:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-23 0:56 [PATCH 0/5] futex: Wakeup optimizations Davidlohr Bueso
2013-11-23 0:56 ` [PATCH 1/5] futex: Misc cleanups Davidlohr Bueso
2013-11-23 6:52 ` Darren Hart
2013-11-23 0:56 ` [PATCH 2/5] futex: Check for pi futex_q only once Davidlohr Bueso
2013-11-23 6:33 ` Darren Hart
2013-11-24 5:19 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-11-23 0:56 ` [PATCH 3/5] futex: Larger hash table Davidlohr Bueso
2013-11-23 6:52 ` Darren Hart
2013-11-23 0:56 ` [PATCH 4/5] futex: Avoid taking hb lock if nothing to wakeup Davidlohr Bueso
2013-11-23 1:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-11-23 3:03 ` Jason Low
2013-11-23 3:19 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-11-23 7:23 ` Darren Hart
2013-11-23 13:16 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-11-24 3:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-11-24 5:15 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-11-25 12:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-11-25 16:23 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-11-25 16:36 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2013-11-25 17:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-11-25 17:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-25 18:55 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-11-25 19:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-11-25 19:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-11-25 20:03 ` Darren Hart
2013-11-25 20:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-11-26 13:53 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-11-23 4:05 ` Waiman Long
2013-11-23 5:40 ` Darren Hart
2013-11-23 5:42 ` Hart, Darren
2013-11-23 7:20 ` Darren Hart
2013-11-23 0:56 ` [PATCH 5/5] sched,futex: Provide delayed wakeup list Davidlohr Bueso
2013-11-23 11:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-23 12:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-24 5:25 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-11-23 5:55 ` [PATCH 0/5] futex: Wakeup optimizations Darren Hart
2013-11-23 6:35 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-11-23 6:38 ` Davidlohr Bueso
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-01-12 23:31 [PATCH v6 " Davidlohr Bueso
2014-01-12 23:31 ` [PATCH 4/5] futex: Avoid taking hb lock if nothing to wakeup Davidlohr Bueso
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=20131125163627.GC10022@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
--cc=aswin@hp.com \
--cc=davidlohr@hp.com \
--cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=jeffm@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tom.vaden@hp.com \
--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