From: "Nicolai Hähnle" <nhaehnle@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Nicolai Hähnle" <Nicolai.Haehnle@amd.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Maarten Lankhorst" <dev@mblankhorst.nl>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
"Chris Wilson" <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 04/11] locking/ww_mutex: Set use_ww_ctx even when locking without a context
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 15:06:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1480601214-26583-5-git-send-email-nhaehnle@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1480601214-26583-1-git-send-email-nhaehnle@gmail.com>
From: Nicolai Hähnle <Nicolai.Haehnle@amd.com>
We will add a new field to struct mutex_waiter. This field must be
initialized for all waiters if any waiter uses the ww_use_ctx path.
So there is a trade-off: Keep ww_mutex locking without a context on the
faster non-use_ww_ctx path, at the cost of adding the initialization to all
mutex locks (including non-ww_mutexes), or avoid the additional cost for
non-ww_mutex locks, at the cost of adding additional checks to the
use_ww_ctx path.
We take the latter choice. It may be worth eliminating the users of
ww_mutex_lock(lock, NULL), but there are a lot of them.
Move the declaration of ww in __mutex_lock_common closer to its uses
because gcc otherwise (incorrectly) believes ww may be used without
initialization.
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <dev@mblankhorst.nl>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Signed-off-by: Nicolai Hähnle <Nicolai.Haehnle@amd.com>
---
include/linux/ww_mutex.h | 11 ++---------
kernel/locking/mutex.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/ww_mutex.h b/include/linux/ww_mutex.h
index 2bb5deb..a5960e5 100644
--- a/include/linux/ww_mutex.h
+++ b/include/linux/ww_mutex.h
@@ -222,11 +222,7 @@ extern int __must_check __ww_mutex_lock_interruptible(struct ww_mutex *lock,
*/
static inline int ww_mutex_lock(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx)
{
- if (ctx)
- return __ww_mutex_lock(lock, ctx);
-
- mutex_lock(&lock->base);
- return 0;
+ return __ww_mutex_lock(lock, ctx);
}
/**
@@ -262,10 +258,7 @@ static inline int ww_mutex_lock(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ct
static inline int __must_check ww_mutex_lock_interruptible(struct ww_mutex *lock,
struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx)
{
- if (ctx)
- return __ww_mutex_lock_interruptible(lock, ctx);
- else
- return mutex_lock_interruptible(&lock->base);
+ return __ww_mutex_lock_interruptible(lock, ctx);
}
/**
diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
index 200629a..585627f 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
@@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ bool mutex_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock, struct task_struct *owner,
break;
}
- if (use_ww_ctx && ww_ctx->acquired > 0) {
+ if (use_ww_ctx && ww_ctx && ww_ctx->acquired > 0) {
struct ww_mutex *ww;
ww = container_of(lock, struct ww_mutex, base);
@@ -640,10 +640,11 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
struct mutex_waiter waiter;
unsigned long flags;
bool first = false;
- struct ww_mutex *ww;
int ret;
- if (use_ww_ctx) {
+ if (use_ww_ctx && ww_ctx) {
+ struct ww_mutex *ww;
+
ww = container_of(lock, struct ww_mutex, base);
if (unlikely(ww_ctx == READ_ONCE(ww->ctx)))
return -EALREADY;
@@ -656,8 +657,12 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
mutex_optimistic_spin(lock, ww_ctx, use_ww_ctx, false)) {
/* got the lock, yay! */
lock_acquired(&lock->dep_map, ip);
- if (use_ww_ctx)
+ if (use_ww_ctx && ww_ctx) {
+ struct ww_mutex *ww;
+
+ ww = container_of(lock, struct ww_mutex, base);
ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(ww, ww_ctx);
+ }
preempt_enable();
return 0;
}
@@ -702,7 +707,7 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
goto err;
}
- if (use_ww_ctx && ww_ctx->acquired > 0) {
+ if (use_ww_ctx && ww_ctx && ww_ctx->acquired > 0) {
ret = __ww_mutex_lock_check_stamp(lock, ww_ctx);
if (ret)
goto err;
@@ -742,8 +747,12 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
/* got the lock - cleanup and rejoice! */
lock_acquired(&lock->dep_map, ip);
- if (use_ww_ctx)
+ if (use_ww_ctx && ww_ctx) {
+ struct ww_mutex *ww;
+
+ ww = container_of(lock, struct ww_mutex, base);
ww_mutex_set_context_slowpath(ww, ww_ctx);
+ }
spin_unlock_mutex(&lock->wait_lock, flags);
preempt_enable();
@@ -830,8 +839,9 @@ __ww_mutex_lock(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx)
might_sleep();
ret = __mutex_lock_common(&lock->base, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE,
- 0, &ctx->dep_map, _RET_IP_, ctx, 1);
- if (!ret && ctx->acquired > 1)
+ 0, ctx ? &ctx->dep_map : NULL, _RET_IP_,
+ ctx, 1);
+ if (!ret && ctx && ctx->acquired > 1)
return ww_mutex_deadlock_injection(lock, ctx);
return ret;
@@ -845,9 +855,10 @@ __ww_mutex_lock_interruptible(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx)
might_sleep();
ret = __mutex_lock_common(&lock->base, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE,
- 0, &ctx->dep_map, _RET_IP_, ctx, 1);
+ 0, ctx ? &ctx->dep_map : NULL, _RET_IP_,
+ ctx, 1);
- if (!ret && ctx->acquired > 1)
+ if (!ret && ctx && ctx->acquired > 1)
return ww_mutex_deadlock_injection(lock, ctx);
return ret;
@@ -1034,7 +1045,8 @@ __ww_mutex_lock(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx)
might_sleep();
if (__mutex_trylock_fast(&lock->base)) {
- ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(lock, ctx);
+ if (ctx)
+ ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(lock, ctx);
return 0;
}
@@ -1048,7 +1060,8 @@ __ww_mutex_lock_interruptible(struct ww_mutex *lock, struct ww_acquire_ctx *ctx)
might_sleep();
if (__mutex_trylock_fast(&lock->base)) {
- ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(lock, ctx);
+ if (ctx)
+ ww_mutex_set_context_fastpath(lock, ctx);
return 0;
}
--
2.7.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-01 14:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-01 14:06 [PATCH v2 00/11] locking/ww_mutex: Keep sorted wait list to avoid stampedes Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-01 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 01/11] drm/vgem: Use ww_mutex_(un)lock even with a NULL context Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-01 14:18 ` Chris Wilson
2016-12-01 15:14 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-12-01 16:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-01 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 02/11] locking/ww_mutex: Re-check ww->ctx in the inner optimistic spin loop Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-01 14:36 ` Chris Wilson
2016-12-06 15:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-06 16:03 ` Waiman Long
2016-12-06 18:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-06 18:46 ` Waiman Long
2016-12-01 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 03/11] locking/ww_mutex: Extract stamp comparison to __ww_mutex_stamp_after Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-01 14:42 ` Chris Wilson
2016-12-01 14:06 ` Nicolai Hähnle [this message]
2016-12-06 15:14 ` [PATCH v2 04/11] locking/ww_mutex: Set use_ww_ctx even when locking without a context Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-06 15:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-16 13:17 ` Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-17 7:53 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2016-12-17 13:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-01 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 05/11] locking/ww_mutex: Add waiters in stamp order Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-01 15:59 ` Chris Wilson
2016-12-16 14:21 ` Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-06 15:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-16 13:34 ` Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-06 16:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-16 14:19 ` Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-16 14:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-16 17:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-16 18:11 ` Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-16 20:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-16 22:35 ` Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-16 17:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-16 18:12 ` Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-01 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 06/11] locking/ww_mutex: Notify waiters that have to back off while adding tasks to wait list Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-01 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 07/11] locking/ww_mutex: Wake at most one waiter for back off when acquiring the lock Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-01 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 08/11] locking/ww_mutex: Yield to other waiters from optimistic spin Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-01 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 09/11] locking/mutex: Initialize mutex_waiter::ww_ctx with poison when debugging Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-01 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 10/11] Documentation/locking/ww_mutex: Update the design document Nicolai Hähnle
2016-12-01 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 11/11] [rfc] locking/ww_mutex: Always spin optimistically for the first waiter Nicolai Hähnle
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=1480601214-26583-5-git-send-email-nhaehnle@gmail.com \
--to=nhaehnle@gmail.com \
--cc=Nicolai.Haehnle@amd.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dev@mblankhorst.nl \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®