Re: [PATCH 1/1] locking/qspinlock: Fix state-transition changes in comments

[Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>]

On 5/6/23 02:29, Qiuxu Zhuo wrote:
> 1. There may be concurrent locker CPUs to set the qspinlock pending bit.
>
>     The first CPU (called pending CPU) of these CPUs sets the pending
>     bit to make the state transition (the qspinlock pending bit is set):
>
>           0,0,* -> 0,1,*
>
>     The rest of these CPUs are queued to the MCS queue to make the state
>     transition (the qspinlock tail is updated):
>
>           0,1,* -> *,1,*
>
>     The pending CPU waits until the locker owner goes away to make
>     the state transition (the qspinlock locked field is set to zero):
>
>           *,1,* -> *,1,0
>
>     The pending CPU takes the ownership and clears the pending bit
>     to make the state transition:
>
>           *,1,0 -> *,0,1
>
> 2. The header of the MCS queue takes the ownership and calls set_locked()
>     to make the state transition:
>
>           *,*,0 -> *,*,1

That is not true. The pending bit owner has priority over the MCS queue 
head. So the pending bit must be 0 before the MCS queue head can take 
over the lock. So

     *,0,0 -> *,0,1

>
> Fix the state-transition changes above in the code comments accordingly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com>
> ---
>   kernel/locking/qspinlock.c | 10 ++++++----
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> index ebe6b8ec7cb3..efebbf19f887 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> @@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ static __always_inline u32 queued_fetch_set_pending_acquire(struct qspinlock *lo
>    * set_locked - Set the lock bit and own the lock
>    * @lock: Pointer to queued spinlock structure
>    *
> - * *,*,0 -> *,0,1
> + * *,*,0 -> *,*,1
set_locked() can only be called when it is sure that the pending bit 
isn't set.
>    */
>   static __always_inline void set_locked(struct qspinlock *lock)
>   {
> @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ void __lockfunc queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
>   	/*
>   	 * trylock || pending
>   	 *
> -	 * 0,0,* -> 0,1,* -> 0,0,1 pending, trylock
> +	 * 0,0,* -> 0,1,* -> ... -> *,0,1 pending, trylock

By the time trylock is done, there may be entries in the queue. However, 
I doubt it helps by adding "..." in between possible multiple transitions.


>   	 */
>   	val = queued_fetch_set_pending_acquire(lock);
>   
> @@ -358,6 +358,8 @@ void __lockfunc queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
>   	 * Undo and queue; our setting of PENDING might have made the
>   	 * n,0,0 -> 0,0,0 transition fail and it will now be waiting
>   	 * on @next to become !NULL.
> +	 *
> +	 * 0,1,* -> *,1,*
There is already a "n,0,0 -> 0,0,0" above, adding a new one may just 
confuse people.
>   	 */
>   	if (unlikely(val & ~_Q_LOCKED_MASK)) {
>   
> @@ -371,7 +373,7 @@ void __lockfunc queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
>   	/*
>   	 * We're pending, wait for the owner to go away.
>   	 *
> -	 * 0,1,1 -> *,1,0
> +	 * *,1,* -> *,1,0

This refers to the wait loop. We don't need to wait if the owner has gone.


>   	 *
>   	 * this wait loop must be a load-acquire such that we match the
>   	 * store-release that clears the locked bit and create lock
> @@ -385,7 +387,7 @@ void __lockfunc queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
>   	/*
>   	 * take ownership and clear the pending bit.
>   	 *
> -	 * 0,1,0 -> 0,0,1
> +	 * *,1,0 -> *,0,1

That is the part that we can make the change in the transition diagram 
as noted.

Cheers,
Longman