From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <will.deacon@arm.com>,
<mingo@redhat.com>, <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
<boqun.feng@gmail.com>, <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/3] locking/qrwlock: Use smp_cond_load_acquire()
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:45:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <570D262B.3000005@hpe.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160412045827.GA18437@linux-uzut.site>
On 04/12/2016 12:58 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Apr 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
>> Use smp_cond_load_acquire() to make better use of the hardware
>> assisted 'spin' wait on arm64.
>>
>> Arguably the second hunk is the more horrid abuse possible, but
>> avoids having to use cmpwait (see next patch) directly. Also, this
>> makes 'clever' (ab)use of the cond+rmb acquire to omit the acquire
>> from cmpxchg().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
>> ---
>> kernel/locking/qrwlock.c | 18 ++++--------------
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>
>> --- a/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
>> +++ b/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
>> @@ -53,10 +53,7 @@ struct __qrwlock {
>> static __always_inline void
>> rspin_until_writer_unlock(struct qrwlock *lock, u32 cnts)
>> {
>> - while ((cnts & _QW_WMASK) == _QW_LOCKED) {
>> - cpu_relax_lowlatency();
>> - cnts = atomic_read_acquire(&lock->cnts);
>> - }
>> + smp_cond_load_acquire(&lock->cnts.counter, (VAL & _QW_WMASK) !=
>> _QW_LOCKED);
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> @@ -109,8 +106,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(queued_read_lock_slowpath)
>> */
>> void queued_write_lock_slowpath(struct qrwlock *lock)
>> {
>> - u32 cnts;
>> -
>> /* Put the writer into the wait queue */
>> arch_spin_lock(&lock->wait_lock);
>>
>> @@ -134,15 +129,10 @@ void queued_write_lock_slowpath(struct q
>> }
>>
>> /* When no more readers, set the locked flag */
>> - for (;;) {
>> - cnts = atomic_read(&lock->cnts);
>> - if ((cnts == _QW_WAITING) &&
>> - (atomic_cmpxchg_acquire(&lock->cnts, _QW_WAITING,
>> - _QW_LOCKED) == _QW_WAITING))
>> - break;
>> + smp_cond_load_acquire(&lock->cnts.counter,
>> + (VAL == _QW_WAITING) &&
>> + atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed(&lock->cnts, _QW_WAITING, _QW_LOCKED)
>> == _QW_WAITING);
>>
>> - cpu_relax_lowlatency();
>
> You would need some variant for cpu_relax_lowlatency otherwise you'll
> be hurting s390, no?
> fwiw back when I was looking at this, I recall thinking about possibly
> introducing
> smp_cond_acquire_lowlatency but never got around to it.
>
> Thanks,
> Davidlohr
The qrwlock is currently only used on x86 architecture. We can also come
back to revisit this issue when other architectures that need the
lowlatency variants are going to use qrwlock.
Cheers,
Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-12 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-04 12:22 [RFC][PATCH 0/3] smp_cond_load_acquire + cmpwait Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-04 12:22 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/3] locking: Replace smp_cond_acquire with smp_cond_load_acquire Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-04 18:20 ` Waiman Long
2016-04-04 12:22 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/3] locking/qrwlock: Use smp_cond_load_acquire() Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-12 4:58 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2016-04-12 16:45 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2016-04-04 12:22 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/3] locking,arm64: Introduce cmpwait() Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-04 13:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-12 16:59 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-13 12:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-26 16:33 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-26 17:15 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-26 20:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-22 16:08 ` Boqun Feng
2016-04-22 16:53 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-23 4:02 ` Boqun Feng
2016-04-23 2:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-23 3:40 ` Boqun Feng
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=570D262B.3000005@hpe.com \
--to=waiman.long@hpe.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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