From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
To: Xinhui Pan <mnipxh@gmail.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Pan Xinhui <xinhui@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] locking/pvqspinlock: Relax cmpxchg's to improve performance on some archs
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 12:05:40 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170208040540.GB9178@tardis.cn.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAH4ORazqsCBA4G5paHtsp8PMfM=J3P6rvyR-53-ZLjn=7U6J0g@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3721 bytes --]
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:39:10AM +0800, Xinhui Pan wrote:
> 2016-12-26 4:26 GMT+08:00 Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>:
>
> > A number of cmpxchg calls in qspinlock_paravirt.h were replaced by more
> > relaxed versions to improve performance on architectures that use LL/SC.
> >
> > All the locking related cmpxchg's are replaced with the _acquire
> > variants:
> > - pv_queued_spin_steal_lock()
> > - trylock_clear_pending()
> >
> > The cmpxchg's related to hashing are replaced by either by the _release
> > or the _relaxed variants. See the inline comment for details.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> >
> > v1->v2:
> > - Add comments in changelog and code for the rationale of the change.
> >
> > ---
> > kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > -------
> > 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> >
> >
> > @@ -323,8 +329,14 @@ static void pv_wait_node(struct mcs_spinlock *node,
> > struct mcs_spinlock *prev)
> > * If pv_kick_node() changed us to vcpu_hashed, retain that
> > * value so that pv_wait_head_or_lock() knows to not also
> > try
> > * to hash this lock.
> > + *
> > + * The smp_store_mb() and control dependency above will
> > ensure
> > + * that state change won't happen before that.
> > Synchronizing
> > + * with pv_kick_node() wrt hashing by this waiter or by the
> > + * lock holder is done solely by the state variable. There
> > is
> > + * no other ordering requirement.
> > */
> > - cmpxchg(&pn->state, vcpu_halted, vcpu_running);
> > + cmpxchg_relaxed(&pn->state, vcpu_halted, vcpu_running);
> >
> > /*
> > * If the locked flag is still not set after wakeup, it is
> > a
> > @@ -360,9 +372,12 @@ static void pv_kick_node(struct qspinlock *lock,
> > struct mcs_spinlock *node)
> > * pv_wait_node(). If OTOH this fails, the vCPU was running and
> > will
> > * observe its next->locked value and advance itself.
> > *
> > - * Matches with smp_store_mb() and cmpxchg() in pv_wait_node()
> > + * Matches with smp_store_mb() and cmpxchg_relaxed() in
> > pv_wait_node().
> > + * A release barrier is used here to ensure that node->locked is
> > + * always set before changing the state. See comment in
> > pv_wait_node().
> > */
> > - if (cmpxchg(&pn->state, vcpu_halted, vcpu_hashed) != vcpu_halted)
> > + if (cmpxchg_release(&pn->state, vcpu_halted, vcpu_hashed)
> > + != vcpu_halted)
> > return;
> >
> > hi, Waiman
> We can't use _release here, a full barrier is needed.
>
> There is pv_kick_node vs pv_wait_head_or_lock
>
> [w] l->locked = _Q_SLOW_VAL //reordered here
>
> if (READ_ONCE(pn->state) == vcpu_hashed) //False.
>
> lp = (struct qspinlock **)1;
>
> [STORE] pn->state = vcpu_hashed lp = pv_hash(lock,
> pn);
> pv_hash() if
> (xchg(&l->locked, _Q_SLOW_VAL) == 0) // fasle, not unhashed.
>
This analysis is correct, but..
> Then the same lock has hashed twice but only unhashed once. So at last as
> the hash table grows big, we hit RCU stall.
>
> I hit RCU stall when I run netperf benchmark
>
how will a big hash table hit RCU stall? Do you have the call trace for
your RCU stall?
Regards,
Boqun
> thanks
> xinhui
>
>
> > --
> > 1.8.3.1
> >
> >
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-08 4:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-25 20:26 Waiman Long
2016-12-26 5:50 ` Boqun Feng
2017-01-03 22:23 ` Waiman Long
2017-01-03 16:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-03 22:07 ` Waiman Long
2017-01-04 9:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-05 8:16 ` Pan Xinhui
2017-01-05 9:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-05 9:51 ` Boqun Feng
2017-01-05 15:17 ` Waiman Long
2017-01-05 15:40 ` Boqun Feng
2017-01-05 15:30 ` Waiman Long
[not found] ` <CAH4ORazqsCBA4G5paHtsp8PMfM=J3P6rvyR-53-ZLjn=7U6J0g@mail.gmail.com>
2017-02-08 4:05 ` Boqun Feng [this message]
2017-02-08 6:09 ` Boqun Feng
2017-02-08 6:47 ` Pan Xinhui
2017-02-08 6:48 ` Pan Xinhui
2017-02-08 7:09 ` Pan Xinhui
2017-02-08 7:15 ` Boqun Feng
[not found] ` <778926a5-cf9f-586b-6bc4-b9453d88aabb@redhat.com>
2017-02-13 2:24 ` panxinhui
2017-02-13 3:19 ` Boqun Feng
2017-02-17 19:01 ` 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=20170208040540.GB9178@tardis.cn.ibm.com \
--to=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mnipxh@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=xinhui@linux.vnet.ibm.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®