mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
	"'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"'peterz@infradead.org'" <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "'mingo@redhat.com'" <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"'will@kernel.org'" <will@kernel.org>,
	"'boqun.feng@gmail.com'" <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	'Linus Torvalds' <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	"'virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org'"
	<virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	'Zeng Heng' <zengheng4@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH next v2 4/5] locking/osq_lock: Avoid writing to node->next in the osq_lock() fast path.
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2023 23:13:25 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <544f928d-4444-4b26-9da6-bdf0c4d9831b@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <06a11b2c7d784f2d80dc8e81c7175c57@AcuMS.aculab.com>


On 12/31/23 16:54, David Laight wrote:
> When osq_lock() returns false or osq_unlock() returns static
> analysis shows that node->next should always be NULL.
> This means that it isn't necessary to explicitly set it to NULL
> prior to atomic_xchg(&lock->tail, curr) on extry to osq_lock().
>
> Just in case there a non-obvious race condition that can leave it
> non-NULL check with WARN_ON_ONCE() and NULL if set.
> Note that without this check the fast path (adding at the list head)
> doesn't need to to access the per-cpu osq_node at all.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Laight <david.laight@aculab.com>
> ---
>   kernel/locking/osq_lock.c | 14 ++++++++++----
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
> index 27324b509f68..35bb99e96697 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
> @@ -87,12 +87,17 @@ osq_wait_next(struct optimistic_spin_queue *lock,
>   
>   bool osq_lock(struct optimistic_spin_queue *lock)
>   {
> -	struct optimistic_spin_node *node = this_cpu_ptr(&osq_node);
> -	struct optimistic_spin_node *prev, *next;
> +	struct optimistic_spin_node *node, *prev, *next;
>   	int curr = encode_cpu(smp_processor_id());
>   	int prev_cpu;
>   
> -	node->next = NULL;
> +	/*
> +	 * node->next should be NULL on entry.
> +	 * Check just in case there is a race somewhere.
> +	 * Note that this is probably an unnecessary cache miss in the fast path.
> +	 */
> +	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(raw_cpu_read(osq_node.next) != NULL))
> +		raw_cpu_write(osq_node.next, NULL);
>   
>   	/*
>   	 * We need both ACQUIRE (pairs with corresponding RELEASE in
> @@ -104,8 +109,9 @@ bool osq_lock(struct optimistic_spin_queue *lock)
>   	if (prev_cpu == OSQ_UNLOCKED_VAL)
>   		return true;
>   
> -	node->prev_cpu = prev_cpu;
> +	node = this_cpu_ptr(&osq_node);
>   	prev = decode_cpu(prev_cpu);
> +	node->prev_cpu = prev_cpu;
>   	node->locked = 0;
>   
>   	/*
Reviewed-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>


  reply	other threads:[~2024-01-01  4:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-12-31 21:49 [PATCH next v2 0/5] locking/osq_lock: Optimisations to osq_lock code David Laight
2023-12-31 21:51 ` [PATCH next v2 1/5] locking/osq_lock: Defer clearing node->locked until the slow osq_lock() path David Laight
2024-01-01  4:08   ` Waiman Long
2024-01-02  9:49   ` Ingo Molnar
2024-01-02  9:51   ` Ingo Molnar
2023-12-31 21:52 ` [PATCH next v2 2/5] locking/osq_lock: Optimise the vcpu_is_preempted() check David Laight
2024-01-01  4:09   ` Waiman Long
2024-01-02  9:49   ` Ingo Molnar
2024-01-08  7:42   ` kernel test robot
2023-12-31 21:54 ` [PATCH next v2 3/5] locking/osq_lock: Use node->prev_cpu instead of saving node->prev David Laight
2024-01-01  4:09   ` Waiman Long
2023-12-31 21:54 ` [PATCH next v2 4/5] locking/osq_lock: Avoid writing to node->next in the osq_lock() fast path David Laight
2024-01-01  4:13   ` Waiman Long [this message]
2024-01-02  9:47   ` Ingo Molnar
2023-12-31 21:55 ` [PATCH next v2 5/5] locking/osq_lock: Optimise decode_cpu() and per_cpu_ptr() David Laight
2024-01-01  4:14   ` Waiman Long
2024-01-01  8:47     ` David Laight
2024-05-03 15:59     ` Waiman Long
2024-05-03 16:16       ` David Laight
2024-05-03 21:10       ` David Laight
2024-05-03 22:13         ` Waiman Long
2024-05-04 20:26           ` David Laight
2024-01-02  9:54   ` Ingo Molnar
2024-01-02 10:20     ` David Laight

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=544f928d-4444-4b26-9da6-bdf0c4d9831b@redhat.com \
    --to=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=zengheng4@huawei.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®