linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	jmario@redhat.com, dzickus@redhat.com,
	Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched,x86: optimize switch_mm for multi-threaded workloads
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 18:16:11 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51F98CAB.80100@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFx3ZHZrgP3yQwb=ttYUeH1zFVQtUA5dFW1h8FPhjfKgUA@mail.gmail.com>

On 07/31/2013 06:07 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> The cause turned out to be unnecessary atomic accesses to the
>> mm_cpumask. When in lazy TLB mode, the CPU is only removed from
>> the mm_cpumask if there is a TLB flush event.
>>
>> Most of the time, no such TLB flush happens, and the kernel
>> skips the TLB reload.  It can also skip the atomic memory
>> set & test.
>
> The patch looks obvious, and I'm not seeing any very clear reasons for
> why we would want that test-and-set to be atomic. That said, I'd like
> to have some explicit comments about exactly why it doesn't need the
> atomicity. Because afaik, there actually are concurrent readers _and_
> writers of that mask, and the accesses are not locked by anything
> here.
 >
> I _think_ the reason for this all being safe is simply that the only
> real race is "We need to set the bit before we load the page table,
> and we're protected against that bit being cleared because the TLB
> state is TLBSTATE_OK and thus TLB flushing will no longer leave that
> mm".
>
> But damn, it all looks subtle as hell. That code does:
>
>                  this_cpu_write(cpu_tlbstate.state, TLBSTATE_OK);
>                  BUG_ON(this_cpu_read(cpu_tlbstate.active_mm) != next);
>
>                  if (!cpumask_test_and_set_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(next))) {
>
> and I'm wondering if we need a barrier to make sure that that
> TLBSTATE_OK write happens *before* we test the cpumask. With
> test_and_set(), we have the barrier in the test-and-set. But with just
> test_bit, I'm not seeing why the compiler couldn't re-order them. I
> suspect it won't, but...

cpumask_set_bit expands to set_bit, which is atomic

Do we need any explicit compiler barrier in addition to the
atomic operation performed by set_bit?

I would be happy to rewrite the comment right above the
cpumask_set_cpu call if you want.

-- 
All rights reversed

  reply	other threads:[~2013-07-31 22:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-31 21:43 [PATCH] sched,x86: optimize switch_mm for multi-threaded workloads Rik van Riel
2013-07-31 21:46 ` Paul Turner
2013-07-31 22:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-07-31 22:16   ` Rik van Riel [this message]
     [not found]     ` <CA+55aFwj+6P4y8MgGTGbiK_EtfY7LJ_bL_7k9zFYLx4S8F0rJQ@mail.gmail.com>
2013-07-31 22:39       ` Rik van Riel
     [not found]         ` <CA+55aFxKSEHSkdsCkTvjwwo4MnEpN0TwJrek2jd1QJCyUTb-=Q@mail.gmail.com>
2013-07-31 23:12           ` Rik van Riel
2013-07-31 23:14             ` Paul Turner
2013-08-01  0:41               ` Linus Torvalds
2013-08-01  1:58                 ` Rik van Riel
2013-08-01  2:14                   ` Linus Torvalds
2013-08-01  2:14                 ` [PATCH -v2] " Rik van Riel
2013-08-01  2:25                   ` Linus Torvalds
2013-08-01  7:04                     ` Ingo Molnar
2013-08-02  9:07                   ` [tip:sched/core] sched/x86: Optimize switch_mm() " tip-bot for Rik van Riel
2013-08-02  9:12                     ` Ingo Molnar
2013-08-02 12:44                       ` Joe Mario
2013-08-03  1:18                       ` Greg KH
2013-08-01 15:37             ` [PATCH] sched,x86: optimize switch_mm " Jörn Engel
2013-08-01 17:45               ` Linus Torvalds
2013-08-01 17:54                 ` Jörn Engel

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=51F98CAB.80100@redhat.com \
    --to=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jmario@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --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).