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, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] locking/osq: Use more optimized spinning for arm64
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 10:38:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200109153831.29993-1-longman@redhat.com> (raw)
Arm64 has a more optimized spinning loop (atomic_cond_read_acquire)
for spinlock that can boost performance of sibling threads by putting
the current cpu to a shallow sleep state that is woken up when the
monitored variable changes or an external event happens.
OSQ has a more complicated spinning loop. Besides the lock value, it
also checks for need_resched() and vcpu_is_preempted(). The check for
need_resched() is not a problem as it is only set by the tick interrupt
handler. That will be detected by the spinning cpu right after iret.
The vcpu_is_preempted() check, however, is a problem as changes to
the state of of previous node will not affect the sleep state. For
ARM64, vcpu_is_preempted is not defined and so we can just skip the
vcpu_is_preempted() check and use smp_cond_load_relaxed() instead.
On a 2-socket 56-core 224-thread ARM64 system, a kernel mutex locking
microbenchmark was run for 10s with and without the patch. The
performance numbers before patch were:
Running locktest with mutex [runtime = 10s, load = 1]
Threads = 224, Min/Mean/Max = 316/123,143/2,121,269
Threads = 224, Total Rate = 2,757 kop/s; Percpu Rate = 12 kop/s
After patch, the numbers were:
Running locktest with mutex [runtime = 10s, load = 1]
Threads = 224, Min/Mean/Max = 334/147,836/1,304,787
Threads = 224, Total Rate = 3,311 kop/s; Percpu Rate = 15 kop/s
So there was about 20% performance improvement.
Longer term, we may have to define and use a static_key to indicate
that vcpu_is_preempted is defined and it may return a value of true.
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
---
kernel/locking/osq_lock.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
index 6ef600aa0f47..129e8f56ae71 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
@@ -134,6 +134,27 @@ bool osq_lock(struct optimistic_spin_queue *lock)
* cmpxchg in an attempt to undo our queueing.
*/
+ /*
+ * If vcpu_is_preempted is not defined, we can skip the check
+ * and use smp_cond_load_relaxed() instead. For arm64, this
+ * could lead to the use of the more optimized wfe instruction.
+ * As need_sched() is set by interrupt handler, it will break
+ * out and do the unqueue in a timely manner.
+ *
+ * TODO: We may need to add a static_key like vcpu_is_preemptible
+ * as vcpu_is_preempted() will always return false with
+ * bare metal even if it is defined.
+ */
+#ifndef vcpu_is_preempted
+ {
+ int locked = smp_cond_load_relaxed(&node->locked,
+ VAL || need_resched());
+ if (!locked)
+ goto unqueue;
+ return true;
+ }
+#endif
+
while (!READ_ONCE(node->locked)) {
/*
* If we need to reschedule bail... so we can block.
--
2.18.1
next reply other threads:[~2020-01-09 15:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-09 15:38 Waiman Long [this message]
2020-01-10 10:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-01-10 14:13 ` 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=20200109153831.29993-1-longman@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®