From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, peterz@infradead.org,
mingo@kernel.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com,
paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] locking/qspinlock: Remove unbounded cmpxchg loop from locking slowpath
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 16:08:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180406150819.GB10528@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a4649773-9dac-c496-2796-713981ead426@redhat.com>
On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 05:16:16PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 04/05/2018 12:58 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> > /*
> > - * we're pending, wait for the owner to go away.
> > - *
> > - * *,1,1 -> *,1,0
> > - *
> > - * this wait loop must be a load-acquire such that we match the
> > - * store-release that clears the locked bit and create lock
> > - * sequentiality; this is because not all clear_pending_set_locked()
> > - * implementations imply full barriers.
> > - */
> > - smp_cond_load_acquire(&lock->val.counter, !(VAL & _Q_LOCKED_MASK));
> > -
> > - /*
> > - * take ownership and clear the pending bit.
> > - *
> > - * *,1,0 -> *,0,1
> > + * If pending was clear but there are waiters in the queue, then
> > + * we need to undo our setting of pending before we queue ourselves.
> > */
> > - clear_pending_set_locked(lock);
> > - return;
> > + if (!(val & _Q_PENDING_MASK))
> > + atomic_andnot(_Q_PENDING_VAL, &lock->val);
> Can we add a clear_pending() helper that will just clear the byte if
> _Q_PENDING_BITS == 8? That will eliminate one atomic instruction from
> the failure path.
Good idea!
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-06 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-05 16:58 [PATCH 00/10] kernel/locking: qspinlock improvements Will Deacon
2018-04-05 16:58 ` [PATCH 01/10] locking/qspinlock: Don't spin on pending->locked transition in slowpath Will Deacon
2018-04-05 16:58 ` [PATCH 02/10] locking/qspinlock: Remove unbounded cmpxchg loop from locking slowpath Will Deacon
2018-04-05 17:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-06 15:08 ` Will Deacon
2018-04-05 17:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-05 21:16 ` Waiman Long
2018-04-06 15:08 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2018-04-06 20:50 ` Waiman Long
2018-04-06 21:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-07 8:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-07 23:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-09 10:58 ` Will Deacon
2018-04-07 9:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-09 10:58 ` Will Deacon
2018-04-09 14:54 ` Will Deacon
2018-04-09 15:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-09 17:19 ` Will Deacon
2018-04-10 9:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-20 16:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-20 16:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-09 19:33 ` Waiman Long
2018-04-09 17:55 ` Waiman Long
2018-04-10 13:49 ` Sasha Levin
2018-04-05 16:59 ` [PATCH 03/10] locking/qspinlock: Kill cmpxchg loop when claiming lock from head of queue Will Deacon
2018-04-05 17:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-06 10:54 ` Will Deacon
2018-04-05 16:59 ` [PATCH 04/10] locking/qspinlock: Use atomic_cond_read_acquire Will Deacon
2018-04-05 16:59 ` [PATCH 05/10] locking/mcs: Use smp_cond_load_acquire() in mcs spin loop Will Deacon
2018-04-05 16:59 ` [PATCH 06/10] barriers: Introduce smp_cond_load_relaxed and atomic_cond_read_relaxed Will Deacon
2018-04-05 17:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-06 10:55 ` Will Deacon
2018-04-05 16:59 ` [PATCH 07/10] locking/qspinlock: Use smp_cond_load_relaxed to wait for next node Will Deacon
2018-04-05 16:59 ` [PATCH 08/10] locking/qspinlock: Merge struct __qspinlock into struct qspinlock Will Deacon
2018-04-07 5:23 ` Boqun Feng
2018-04-05 16:59 ` [PATCH 09/10] locking/qspinlock: Make queued_spin_unlock use smp_store_release Will Deacon
2018-04-05 16:59 ` [PATCH 10/10] locking/qspinlock: Elide back-to-back RELEASE operations with smp_wmb() Will Deacon
2018-04-05 17:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-06 11:34 ` Will Deacon
2018-04-06 13:05 ` Andrea Parri
2018-04-06 15:27 ` Will Deacon
2018-04-06 15:49 ` Andrea Parri
2018-04-07 5:47 ` Boqun Feng
2018-04-09 10:47 ` Will Deacon
2018-04-06 13:22 ` [PATCH 00/10] kernel/locking: qspinlock improvements Andrea Parri
2018-04-11 10:20 ` Catalin Marinas
2018-04-11 15:39 ` Andrea Parri
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=20180406150819.GB10528@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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