From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>,
Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] locking/rwsem: reduce spinlock contention in wakeup after up_read/up_write
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 18:52:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150428165226.GG23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1429898069-28907-1-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hp.com>
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 01:54:29PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> +static inline bool rwsem_has_active_writer(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
> +{
> + return READ_ONCE(sem->owner) != NULL;
> +}
> +static inline bool rwsem_has_spinner(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
> +{
> + return osq_is_locked(&sem->osq);
> +}
> + /*
> + * If a spinner is present, it is not necessary to do the wakeup.
> + * Try to do wakeup only if the trylock succeeds to minimize
> + * spinlock contention which may introduce too much delay in the
> + * unlock operation.
> + *
> + * spinning writer up_write/up_read caller
> + * --------------- -----------------------
> + * [S] osq_unlock() [L] osq
> + * MB MB
> + * [RmW] rwsem_try_write_lock() [RmW] spin_trylock(wait_lock)
> + *
> + * Here, it is important to make sure that there won't be a missed
> + * wakeup while the rwsem is free and the only spinning writer goes
> + * to sleep without taking the rwsem. In case the spinning writer is
> + * just going to break out of the waiting loop, it will still do a
> + * trylock in rwsem_down_write_failed() before sleeping. IOW, if
> + * rwsem_has_spinner() is true, it will guarantee at least one
> + * trylock attempt on the rwsem.
> + */
> + if (!rwsem_has_spinner(sem)) {
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait_lock, flags);
> + } else {
> + /*
> + * rwsem_has_spinner() is an atomic read while spin_trylock
> + * does not guarantee a full memory barrier. Insert a memory
> + * barrier here to make sure that wait_lock isn't read until
> + * after osq.
> + * Note: smp_rmb__after_atomic() should be used if available.
> + */
> + smp_mb__after_atomic();
Sorry, that's wrong. the smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic() are for all
atomic (RmW) ops that do not return a value.
They end up as whatever barrier is required to make real atomic (RmW)
ops (LOCK on x86, LL/SC on risc etc) ordered. And all atomic (RmW) ops
that return a value are already guaranteed to imply full ordering
semantics.
Note, the (RmW) part is important here, atomic_{set,read}() are _NOT_
read-modify-write ops.
> + if (!raw_spin_trylock_irqsave(&sem->wait_lock, flags))
> + return sem;
> + }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-28 16:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-24 17:54 Waiman Long
2015-04-24 20:39 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-04-27 20:25 ` Waiman Long
2015-04-28 18:17 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-04-29 19:58 ` Waiman Long
2015-04-30 14:12 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-04-30 20:25 ` Waiman Long
2015-04-28 16:52 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-04-28 17:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-28 17:50 ` Jason Low
2015-04-28 17:59 ` Jason Low
2015-04-28 18:05 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-04-30 21:34 ` 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=20150428165226.GG23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=doug.hatch@hp.com \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.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