From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mark Ray <mark.ray@hpe.com>,
Joe Mario <jmario@redhat.com>,
Scott Norton <scott.norton@hpe.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] locking/rwsem: Take read lock immediate if empty queue with no writer
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:31:30 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1531247490-26852-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> (raw)
It was found that a constant stream of readers might cause the count to
go negative most of the time after an initial trigger by a writer even
if no writer was present afterward. As a result, most of the readers
would have to go through the slowpath reducing their performance.
To avoid that from happening, an additional check is added to detect
the special case that the reader in the critical section is the only
one in the wait queue and no writer is present. When that happens, it
can just have the lock and return immediately without further action.
Other incoming readers won't see a waiter is present and be forced
into the slowpath.
After the list_empty() calls, the CPU should have the lock cacheline
anyway, so an additional semaphore count check shouldn't have any
performance impact.
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
---
kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
index 3064c50..ef8a5f3 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
@@ -233,8 +233,22 @@ static void __rwsem_mark_wake(struct rw_semaphore *sem,
waiter.type = RWSEM_WAITING_FOR_READ;
raw_spin_lock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
- if (list_empty(&sem->wait_list))
+ if (list_empty(&sem->wait_list)) {
+ /*
+ * In the unlikely event that the task is the only one in
+ * the wait queue and a writer isn't present, it can have
+ * the lock and return immediately without going through
+ * the remaining slowpath code.
+ *
+ * Count won't be 0, but allowing it will probably generate
+ * better code.
+ */
+ if (unlikely(atomic_long_read(&sem->count) >= 0)) {
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
+ return sem;
+ }
adjustment += RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS;
+ }
list_add_tail(&waiter.list, &sem->wait_list);
/* we're now waiting on the lock, but no longer actively locking */
--
1.8.3.1
next reply other threads:[~2018-07-10 18:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-10 18:31 Waiman Long [this message]
2018-07-13 10:02 ` Will Deacon
2018-07-13 18:32 ` Waiman Long
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=1531247490-26852-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=jmario@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.ray@hpe.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=scott.norton@hpe.com \
--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
Powered by JetHome