From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752510AbdBTLAN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 20 Feb 2017 06:00:13 -0500
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:48544 "EHLO
        bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751147AbdBTLAM (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 20 Feb 2017 06:00:12 -0500
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:00:09 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Pan Xinhui <xinhui@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] locking/pvqspinlock: Relax cmpxchg's to improve
 performance on some archs
Message-ID: <20170220110009.GN6500@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1487364220-11641-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com>
 <20170220042052.GA4529@andrea>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170220042052.GA4529@andrea>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 05:20:52AM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 03:43:40PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:

> > @@ -361,6 +361,9 @@ static void pv_kick_node(struct qspinlock *lock, struct mcs_spinlock *node)
> >  	 * observe its next->locked value and advance itself.
> >  	 *
> >  	 * Matches with smp_store_mb() and cmpxchg() in pv_wait_node()
> > +	 *
> > +	 * We can't used relaxed form of cmpxchg here as the loading of
> > +	 * pn->state can happen before setting next->locked in some archs.
> >  	 */
> >  	if (cmpxchg(&pn->state, vcpu_halted, vcpu_hashed) != vcpu_halted)
> 
> Hi Waiman.
> 
> cmpxchg() does not guarantee the (here implied) smp_mb(), in general; c.f.,
> e.g., arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic_ll_sc.h, where cmpxchg() get "compiled"
> to something like:
> 
>     _loop: ldxr; eor; cbnz _exit; stlxr; cbnz _loop; dmb ish; _exit:


So cmpxchg() should have an effective smp_mb() before and after the
operation, _except_ in the case of failure, in which case it need not
imply any barrier.

And since a successful cmpxchg does the store, which is a store-release
in that arm64 sequence, that provides the ordering against all prior
state. The dmb-ish provides the required barrier after the operation.