Re: [4.2, Regression] Queued spinlocks cause major XFS performance regression

[Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>]

On Fri, 04 Sep 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

>-static inline bool virt_queued_spin_lock(struct qspinlock *lock)
>+static inline bool virt_spin_lock(struct qspinlock *lock)

Given that we fall back to the cmpxchg loop even when PARAVIRT is not in the
picture, I believe this function is horribly misnamed.

> {
> 	if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR))
> 		return false;
>
>-	while (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->val, 0, _Q_LOCKED_VAL) != 0)
>-		cpu_relax();
>+	/*
>+	 * On hypervisors without PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS support we fall
>+	 * back to a Test-and-Set spinlock, because fair locks have
>+	 * horrible lock 'holder' preemption issues.
>+	 */
>+

This comment is also misleading... but if you tuck the whole function
under some PARAVIRT option, it obviously makes sense to just leave as is.
And let native actually _use_ qspinlocks.

>+	do {
>+		while (atomic_read(&lock->val) != 0)
>+			cpu_relax();
>+	} while (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->val, 0, _Q_LOCKED_VAL) != 0);

CCAS to the rescue again.

Thanks,
Davidlohr