From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Paul E.McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Aswin Chandramouleeswaran <aswin@hp.com>,
"Norton, Scott J" <scott.norton@hp.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rwsem: Support optimistic spinning
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 20:04:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140430180441.GF17778@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1398880209.2970.100.camel@schen9-DESK>
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:50:09AM -0700, Tim Chen wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 10:27 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 03:09:01PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > > +/*
> > > + * Try to acquire write lock before the writer has been put on wait queue.
> > > + */
> > > +static inline bool rwsem_try_write_lock_unqueued(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
> > > +{
> > > + long count = ACCESS_ONCE(sem->count);
> > > +retry:
> > > + if (count == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS) {
> > > + count = cmpxchg(&sem->count, RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS,
> > > + RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS + RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS);
count = RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS
new = RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS + RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS
new = count + RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS
> > > + /* allow write lock stealing, try acquiring the write lock. */
> > > + if (count == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)
> > > + goto acquired;
> > > + else if (count == 0)
> > > + goto retry;
> > > + } else if (count == 0) {
> > > + count = cmpxchg(&sem->count, 0, RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS);
count = 0
new = RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS
new = count + RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS
> > > + if (count == 0)
> > > + goto acquired;
> > > + else if (count == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)
> > > + goto retry;
> > > + }
> > > + return false;
> > > +
> > > +acquired:
> > > + return true;
> > > +}
> >
> > Could we have written that like:
> >
> > static inline bool rwsem_try_write_lock_unqueued(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
> > {
> > long old, count = ACCESS_ONCE(sem->count);
> >
> > for (;;) {
> > if (!(count == 0 || count == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS))
> > return false;
> >
> > old = cmpxchg(&sem->count, count, count + RWSEM_ACTIVE_BIAS);
>
> Above line won't be correct for the case when count == 0. We are trying
> to acquire write lock, so the sem->count should become
> RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS, or RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS + RWSEM_ACTIVE_BIAS.
> So we should change the logic to
>
> if (count == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)
> old = cmpxchg(&sem->count, count, count + RWSEM_ACTIVE_BIAS);
> else
> old = cmpxchg(&sem->count, count, count + RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS);
I think I simply mis-typed it; shouldn't both cases be
RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS ?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-30 18:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-22 22:19 [PATCH] rwsem: Support optimistic spinning Davidlohr Bueso
2014-04-28 5:19 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-04-28 7:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-28 17:18 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-04-28 22:09 ` [PATCH v2] " Davidlohr Bueso
2014-04-28 23:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-04-29 0:50 ` Tim Chen
2014-04-29 3:05 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-04-29 15:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-04-29 16:00 ` Tim Chen
2014-06-04 17:57 ` Andev
2014-06-04 19:44 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-04-30 8:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-30 8:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-30 16:17 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-04-30 17:50 ` Tim Chen
2014-04-30 18:04 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-04-30 18:08 ` Tim Chen
2014-04-30 21:01 ` Tim Chen
2014-04-30 21:06 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-04-30 21:28 ` Tim Chen
2014-04-30 9:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-30 16:33 ` Jason Low
2014-04-30 16:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-30 9:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-30 16:23 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-04-30 9:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-30 16:32 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-04-30 16:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-30 10:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-30 16:42 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-01 3:21 ` [PATCH v3] " Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-01 16:39 ` Tim Chen
2014-05-01 20:32 ` Jason Low
2014-05-02 18:24 ` [PATCH v4] " Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-19 13:12 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-19 21:47 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-19 22:39 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-19 23:14 ` Jason Low
2014-05-20 0:27 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-20 0:54 ` [tip:locking/core] rwsem: Fix warnings for CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK tip-bot for Davidlohr Bueso
2014-06-05 14:32 ` [tip:locking/core] locking/rwsem: " tip-bot for Davidlohr Bueso
2014-06-05 8:38 ` [PATCH v4] rwsem: Support optimistic spinning Ingo Molnar
2014-06-05 16:03 ` Tim Chen
2014-06-05 14:32 ` [tip:locking/core] locking/rwsem: " tip-bot for Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-14 15:01 ` [PATCH v5] rwsem: " 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=20140430180441.GF17778@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.shi@linaro.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=aswin@hp.com \
--cc=davidlohr@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=walken@google.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