Re: [PATCH] 2.5.7-dj1 remove global semaphore_lock spin lock.

Re: [PATCH] 2.5.7-dj1 remove global semaphore_lock spin lock.

[Balbir Singh]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii, Size: 312 bytes --]

The patch seems nice, except for one thing,

I would like to see

add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked and
remove_wait_queue_locked as inline functions.

Comments,
Balbir


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards®
http://movies.yahoo.com/

[PATCH] 2.5.7-dj1 remove global semaphore_lock spin lock.

[Bob Miller]

Below is a patch for i386 that replaces the global spin lock semaphore_lock,
with the rwlock_t embedded in the wait_queue_head_t in the struct semaphore.

None of the data protected by semaphore_lock lock is global and there is
no need to restrict the system to only allow one semaphore to be dealt with
at a time.

This removes 2 lock round trips from __down() and __down_interruptible().
It also reduces the number the cache lines touched by 1 (i.e.: cache line with
semaphore_lock).

This work has only been done for i386 because that is the only arch I have
access to for testing.  The same changes could be applied to arm, ia64, s390,
s390x and sparc if requested.

-- 
Bob Miller					Email: rem@osdl.org
Open Source Development Lab			Phone: 503.626.2455 Ext. 17


diff -ru linux-2.5.7-dj1-orig/arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c linux-2.5.7-dj1/arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c
--- linux-2.5.7-dj1-orig/arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c	Mon Mar 18 12:37:13 2002
+++ linux-2.5.7-dj1/arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c	Fri Mar 22 11:32:10 2002
@@ -29,7 +29,8 @@
  * the increment operation.
  *
  * "sleeping" and the contention routine ordering is
- * protected by the semaphore spinlock.
+ * protected by the read/write lock in the semaphore's
+ * waitqueue head.
  *
  * Note that these functions are only called when there is
  * contention on the lock, and as such all this is the
@@ -53,39 +54,41 @@
 	wake_up(&sem->wait);
 }
 
-static spinlock_t semaphore_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
-
 void __down(struct semaphore * sem)
 {
 	struct task_struct *tsk = current;
 	DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
+	unsigned long flags;
+
 	tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
-	add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+	wq_write_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
+	add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
 
-	spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
 	sem->sleepers++;
 	for (;;) {
 		int sleepers = sem->sleepers;
 
 		/*
 		 * Add "everybody else" into it. They aren't
-		 * playing, because we own the spinlock.
+		 * playing, because we own the wait lock
+		 * exclusivly.
 		 */
 		if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers - 1, &sem->count)) {
 			sem->sleepers = 0;
 			break;
 		}
 		sem->sleepers = 1;	/* us - see -1 above */
-		spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
+		wq_write_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
 
 		schedule();
+
+		wq_write_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
 		tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
-		spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
 	}
-	spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
-	remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
+	remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+	wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
+	wq_write_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
 	tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
-	wake_up(&sem->wait);
 }
 
 int __down_interruptible(struct semaphore * sem)
@@ -93,11 +96,13 @@
 	int retval = 0;
 	struct task_struct *tsk = current;
 	DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
+	unsigned long flags;
+
 	tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
-	add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+	wq_write_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
+	add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
 
-	spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
-	sem->sleepers ++;
+	sem->sleepers++;
 	for (;;) {
 		int sleepers = sem->sleepers;
 
@@ -117,25 +122,27 @@
 
 		/*
 		 * Add "everybody else" into it. They aren't
-		 * playing, because we own the spinlock. The
-		 * "-1" is because we're still hoping to get
-		 * the lock.
+		 * playing, because we own the wait lock
+		 * exclusivly. The "-1" is because we're still
+		 * hoping to get the semaphore.
 		 */
 		if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers - 1, &sem->count)) {
 			sem->sleepers = 0;
 			break;
 		}
 		sem->sleepers = 1;	/* us - see -1 above */
-		spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
+		wq_write_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
 
 		schedule();
+
+		wq_write_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
 		tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
-		spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
 	}
-	spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
+	remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+	wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
+	wq_write_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
+
 	tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
-	remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
-	wake_up(&sem->wait);
 	return retval;
 }
 
@@ -152,18 +159,19 @@
 	int sleepers;
 	unsigned long flags;
 
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&semaphore_lock, flags);
+	wq_write_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
 	sleepers = sem->sleepers + 1;
 	sem->sleepers = 0;
 
 	/*
 	 * Add "everybody else" and us into it. They aren't
-	 * playing, because we own the spinlock.
+	 * playing, because we own the wait lock exclusivly.
 	 */
-	if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers, &sem->count))
-		wake_up(&sem->wait);
+	if (!atomic_add_negative(sleepers, &sem->count)) {
+		wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
+	}
 
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&semaphore_lock, flags);
+	wq_write_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
 	return 1;
 }
 
diff -ru linux-2.5.7-dj1-orig/include/linux/sched.h linux-2.5.7-dj1/include/linux/sched.h
--- linux-2.5.7-dj1-orig/include/linux/sched.h	Fri Mar 22 16:33:59 2002
+++ linux-2.5.7-dj1/include/linux/sched.h	Tue Mar 26 09:27:33 2002
@@ -470,6 +470,7 @@
 extern unsigned long prof_shift;
 
 extern void FASTCALL(__wake_up(wait_queue_head_t *q, unsigned int mode, int nr));
+extern void FASTCALL(__wake_up_locked(wait_queue_head_t *q, unsigned int mode));
 extern void FASTCALL(sleep_on(wait_queue_head_t *q));
 extern long FASTCALL(sleep_on_timeout(wait_queue_head_t *q,
 				      signed long timeout));
@@ -486,6 +487,7 @@
 #define wake_up_interruptible(x)	__wake_up((x),TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 1)
 #define wake_up_interruptible_nr(x, nr)	__wake_up((x),TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, nr)
 #define wake_up_interruptible_all(x)	__wake_up((x),TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 0)
+#define wake_up_locked(x)		__wake_up_locked((x),TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)
 asmlinkage long sys_wait4(pid_t pid,unsigned int * stat_addr, int options, struct rusage * ru);
 
 extern int in_group_p(gid_t);
@@ -663,7 +665,9 @@
 
 extern void FASTCALL(add_wait_queue(wait_queue_head_t *q, wait_queue_t * wait));
 extern void FASTCALL(add_wait_queue_exclusive(wait_queue_head_t *q, wait_queue_t * wait));
+extern void FASTCALL(add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(wait_queue_head_t *q, wait_queue_t * wait));
 extern void FASTCALL(remove_wait_queue(wait_queue_head_t *q, wait_queue_t * wait));
+extern void FASTCALL(remove_wait_queue_locked(wait_queue_head_t *q, wait_queue_t * wait));
 
 extern void wait_task_inactive(task_t * p);
 extern void kick_if_running(task_t * p);
diff -ru linux-2.5.7-dj1-orig/kernel/fork.c linux-2.5.7-dj1/kernel/fork.c
--- linux-2.5.7-dj1-orig/kernel/fork.c	Fri Mar 22 11:25:22 2002
+++ linux-2.5.7-dj1/kernel/fork.c	Fri Mar 22 11:32:10 2002
@@ -66,6 +66,15 @@
 	wq_write_unlock_irqrestore(&q->lock, flags);
 }
 
+/*
+ * Must be called with wait queue lock held in write mode.
+ */
+void add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(wait_queue_head_t *q, wait_queue_t * wait)
+{
+	wait->flags |= WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE;
+	__add_wait_queue_tail(q, wait);
+}
+
 void remove_wait_queue(wait_queue_head_t *q, wait_queue_t * wait)
 {
 	unsigned long flags;
@@ -75,6 +84,14 @@
 	wq_write_unlock_irqrestore(&q->lock, flags);
 }
 
+/*
+ * Must be called with wait queue lock held in write mode.
+ */
+void remove_wait_queue_locked(wait_queue_head_t *q, wait_queue_t * wait)
+{
+	__remove_wait_queue(q, wait);
+}
+
 void __init fork_init(unsigned long mempages)
 {
 	/* create a slab on which task_structs can be allocated */
diff -ru linux-2.5.7-dj1-orig/kernel/sched.c linux-2.5.7-dj1/kernel/sched.c
--- linux-2.5.7-dj1-orig/kernel/sched.c	Fri Mar 22 11:25:22 2002
+++ linux-2.5.7-dj1/kernel/sched.c	Mon Mar 25 15:07:21 2002
@@ -857,7 +857,7 @@
  * started to run but is not in state TASK_RUNNING.  try_to_wake_up() returns
  * zero in this (rare) case, and we handle it by continuing to scan the queue.
  */
-static inline void __wake_up_common(wait_queue_head_t *q, unsigned int mode, int nr_exclusive)
+static void __wake_up_common(wait_queue_head_t *q, unsigned int mode, int nr_exclusive)
 {
 	struct list_head *tmp;
 	unsigned int state;
@@ -885,6 +885,15 @@
 	wq_read_unlock_irqrestore(&q->lock, flags);
 }
 
+/*
+ * Same as __wake_up but called with the wait_queue_head_t lock held
+ * in at least read mode.
+ */
+void __wake_up_locked(wait_queue_head_t *q, unsigned int mode)
+{
+	__wake_up_common(q, mode, 1);
+}
+
 void complete(struct completion *x)
 {
 	unsigned long flags;