linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, Waiman.Long@hp.com,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, riel@redhat.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, davidlohr@hp.com, hpa@zytor.com,
	andi@firstfloor.org, aswin@hp.com, scott.norton@hp.com,
	chegu_vinod@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] mutex: Modify the way optimistic spinners are queued
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 12:24:07 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140128202407.GA26416@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140128202334.GO9012@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:23:34PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:13:13AM -0800, Jason Low wrote:
> > The mutex->spin_mlock was introduced in order to ensure that only 1 thread
> > spins for lock acquisition at a time to reduce cache line contention. When
> > lock->owner is NULL and the lock->count is still not 1, the spinner(s) will
> > continually release and obtain the lock->spin_mlock. This can generate
> > quite a bit of overhead/contention, and also might just delay the spinner
> > from getting the lock.
> > 
> > This patch modifies the way optimistic spinners are queued by queuing before
> > entering the optimistic spinning loop as oppose to acquiring before every
> > call to mutex_spin_on_owner(). So in situations where the spinner requires
> > a few extra spins before obtaining the lock, then there will only be 1 spinner
> > trying to get the lock and it will avoid the overhead from unnecessarily
> > unlocking and locking the spin_mlock.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
> 
> One question below.  Also, this might well have a visible effect on
> performance, so would be good to see the numbers.

Never mind, I see the numbers in your patch 0.  :-/

							Thanx, Paul

> > ---
> >  kernel/locking/mutex.c |   16 +++++++---------
> >  1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> > index 85c6be1..7519d27 100644
> > --- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> > +++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> > @@ -419,6 +419,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
> >  	struct mutex_waiter waiter;
> >  	unsigned long flags;
> >  	int ret;
> > +	struct mspin_node node;
> > 
> >  	preempt_disable();
> >  	mutex_acquire_nest(&lock->dep_map, subclass, 0, nest_lock, ip);
> > @@ -449,9 +450,9 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
> >  	if (!mutex_can_spin_on_owner(lock))
> >  		goto slowpath;
> > 
> > +	mspin_lock(MLOCK(lock), &node);
> >  	for (;;) {
> >  		struct task_struct *owner;
> > -		struct mspin_node  node;
> > 
> >  		if (use_ww_ctx && ww_ctx->acquired > 0) {
> >  			struct ww_mutex *ww;
> > @@ -466,19 +467,16 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
> >  			 * performed the optimistic spinning cannot be done.
> >  			 */
> >  			if (ACCESS_ONCE(ww->ctx))
> > -				goto slowpath;
> > +				break;
> >  		}
> > 
> >  		/*
> >  		 * If there's an owner, wait for it to either
> >  		 * release the lock or go to sleep.
> >  		 */
> > -		mspin_lock(MLOCK(lock), &node);
> >  		owner = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->owner);
> > -		if (owner && !mutex_spin_on_owner(lock, owner)) {
> > -			mspin_unlock(MLOCK(lock), &node);
> > -			goto slowpath;
> > -		}
> > +		if (owner && !mutex_spin_on_owner(lock, owner))
> > +			break;
> > 
> >  		if ((atomic_read(&lock->count) == 1) &&
> >  		    (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->count, 1, 0) == 1)) {
> > @@ -495,7 +493,6 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
> >  			preempt_enable();
> >  			return 0;
> >  		}
> > -		mspin_unlock(MLOCK(lock), &node);
> > 
> >  		/*
> >  		 * When there's no owner, we might have preempted between the
> > @@ -504,7 +501,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
> >  		 * the owner complete.
> >  		 */
> >  		if (!owner && (need_resched() || rt_task(task)))
> > -			goto slowpath;
> > +			break;
> > 
> >  		/*
> >  		 * The cpu_relax() call is a compiler barrier which forces
> > @@ -514,6 +511,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
> >  		 */
> >  		arch_mutex_cpu_relax();
> >  	}
> > +	mspin_unlock(MLOCK(lock), &node);
> >  slowpath:
> 
> Are there any remaining goto statements to slowpath?  If so, they need
> to release the lock.  If not, this label should be removed.
> 
> >  #endif
> >  	spin_lock_mutex(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
> > -- 
> > 1.7.1
> > 


  reply	other threads:[~2014-01-28 20:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-01-28 19:13 [PATCH v2 0/5] mutex: Mutex scalability patches Jason Low
2014-01-28 19:13 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] mutex: In mutex_can_spin_on_owner(), return false if task need_resched() Jason Low
2014-01-28 20:20   ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-01-28 22:01     ` Jason Low
2014-01-28 21:09   ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-11 12:41   ` [tip:core/locking] locking/mutexes: Return false if task need_resched() in mutex_can_spin_on_owner() tip-bot for Jason Low
2014-01-28 19:13 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] mutex: Modify the way optimistic spinners are queued Jason Low
2014-01-28 20:23   ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-01-28 20:24     ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2014-01-28 21:17     ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-01-28 22:10     ` Jason Low
2014-02-02 21:58       ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-03-11 12:41   ` [tip:core/locking] locking/mutexes: " tip-bot for Jason Low
2014-03-11 15:24     ` Jason Low
2014-03-11 15:33       ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-28 19:13 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] mutex: Unlock the mutex without the wait_lock Jason Low
2014-03-11 12:41   ` [tip:core/locking] locking/mutexes: " tip-bot for Jason Low
2014-03-12 12:24     ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-12 18:44       ` Jason Low
2014-03-13  7:28       ` [tip:core/locking] locking/mutex: Fix debug checks tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-28 19:13 ` [RFC][PATCH v2 4/5] mutex: Disable preemtion between modifying lock->owner and locking/unlocking mutex Jason Low
2014-01-28 20:54   ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-28 22:17     ` Jason Low
2014-01-28 19:13 ` [RFC][PATCH v2 5/5] mutex: Give spinners a chance to spin_on_owner if need_resched() triggered while queued Jason Low
2014-01-28 21:07   ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-28 22:51     ` Jason Low
2014-01-29 11:51       ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-31  3:29         ` Jason Low
2014-01-31 14:09           ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-31 20:01             ` Jason Low
2014-01-31 20:08               ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-02 21:01                 ` Jason Low
2014-02-02 21:12                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-03 18:39                     ` Jason Low
2014-02-03 19:25                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-03 20:55                         ` Jason Low
2014-02-03 21:06                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-03 21:56                             ` Jason Low
2014-02-04  7:13                         ` Jason Low
2014-02-02 22:02                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-02-02 20:02             ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-05 21:44         ` Waiman Long
2014-02-06 14:04           ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-06 18:45             ` Waiman Long
2014-02-06 20:10               ` Norton, Scott J
2014-02-10 17:01                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-06 17:44           ` Jason Low
2014-02-06 18:37             ` Waiman Long
2014-01-28 21:08 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] mutex: Mutex scalability patches Davidlohr Bueso
2014-01-28 23:11   ` Jason Low

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=20140128202407.GA26416@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=aswin@hp.com \
    --cc=chegu_vinod@hp.com \
    --cc=davidlohr@hp.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
    --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).