From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hpe.com>,
Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hpe.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/locking/core v10 6/7] locking/pvqspinlock: Allow limited lock stealing
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 17:03:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151110160343.GE17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1447114167-47185-7-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 07:09:26PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> @@ -291,7 +292,7 @@ static __always_inline void __pv_wait_head(struct qspinlock *lock,
> void queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
> {
> struct mcs_spinlock *prev, *next, *node;
> - u32 new, old, tail;
> + u32 new, old, tail, locked;
> int idx;
>
> BUILD_BUG_ON(CONFIG_NR_CPUS >= (1U << _Q_TAIL_CPU_BITS));
> @@ -431,11 +432,25 @@ queue:
> * sequentiality; this is because the set_locked() function below
> * does not imply a full barrier.
> *
> + * The PV pv_wait_head_or_lock function, if active, will acquire
> + * the lock and return a non-zero value. So we have to skip the
> + * smp_load_acquire() call. As the next PV queue head hasn't been
> + * designated yet, there is no way for the locked value to become
> + * _Q_SLOW_VAL. So both the set_locked() and the
> + * atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed() calls will be safe.
> + *
> + * If PV isn't active, 0 will be returned instead.
> + *
> */
> - pv_wait_head(lock, node);
> - while ((val = smp_load_acquire(&lock->val.counter)) & _Q_LOCKED_PENDING_MASK)
> + locked = val = pv_wait_head_or_lock(lock, node);
> + if (locked)
> + goto reset_tail_or_wait_next;
> +
> + while ((val = smp_load_acquire(&lock->val.counter))
> + & _Q_LOCKED_PENDING_MASK)
> cpu_relax();
>
> +reset_tail_or_wait_next:
> /*
> * claim the lock:
> *
> @@ -447,8 +462,12 @@ queue:
> * to grab the lock.
> */
> for (;;) {
> - if (val != tail) {
> - set_locked(lock);
> + /*
> + * The lock value may or may not have the _Q_LOCKED_VAL bit set.
> + */
> + if ((val & _Q_TAIL_MASK) != tail) {
> + if (!locked)
> + set_locked(lock);
> break;
> }
> /*
How about this instead? If we've already got _Q_LOCKED_VAL set, issuing
that store again isn't much of a problem, the cacheline is already hot
and we own it and its a regular store not an atomic.
@@ -432,10 +433,13 @@ void queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qs
* does not imply a full barrier.
*
*/
- pv_wait_head(lock, node);
+ if ((val = pv_wait_head_or_lock(lock, node)))
+ goto locked;
+
while ((val = smp_load_acquire(&lock->val.counter)) & _Q_LOCKED_PENDING_MASK)
cpu_relax();
+locked:
/*
* claim the lock:
*
@@ -447,7 +451,8 @@ void queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qs
* to grab the lock.
*/
for (;;) {
- if (val != tail) {
+ /* In the PV case we might already have _Q_LOCKED_VAL set */
+ if ((val & _Q_TAIL_MASK) != tail) {
set_locked(lock);
break;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-10 16:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-10 0:09 [PATCH tip/locking/core v10 0/7] locking/qspinlock: Enhance qspinlock & pvqspinlock performance Waiman Long
2015-11-10 0:09 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v10 1/7] locking/qspinlock: Use _acquire/_release versions of cmpxchg & xchg Waiman Long
2015-11-23 16:26 ` [tip:locking/core] locking/qspinlock: Use _acquire/_release() versions of cmpxchg() & xchg() tip-bot for Waiman Long
2015-11-10 0:09 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v10 2/7] locking/qspinlock: prefetch next node cacheline Waiman Long
2015-11-23 16:27 ` [tip:locking/core] locking/qspinlock: Prefetch the " tip-bot for Waiman Long
2015-11-10 0:09 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v10 3/7] locking/qspinlock: Avoid redundant read of next pointer Waiman Long
2015-11-23 16:27 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Waiman Long
2015-11-10 0:09 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v10 4/7] locking/pvqspinlock, x86: Optimize PV unlock code path Waiman Long
2015-11-23 16:27 ` [tip:locking/core] locking/pvqspinlock, x86: Optimize the " tip-bot for Waiman Long
2015-11-10 0:09 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v10 5/7] locking/pvqspinlock: Collect slowpath lock statistics Waiman Long
2015-11-23 9:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-11-25 19:08 ` Waiman Long
2015-12-04 12:00 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Waiman Long
2015-11-10 0:09 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v10 6/7] locking/pvqspinlock: Allow limited lock stealing Waiman Long
2015-11-10 16:03 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-11-10 19:46 ` Waiman Long
2015-11-10 21:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-11-10 0:09 ` [PATCH tip/locking/core v10 7/7] locking/pvqspinlock: Queue node adaptive spinning Waiman Long
2015-12-04 12:00 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Waiman Long
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=20151110160343.GE17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hpe.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=doug.hatch@hpe.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=scott.norton@hpe.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.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