From: "Måns Rullgård" <mans@mansr.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: ralf@linux-mips.org, ddaney@caviumnetworks.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] mips: Fix arch_spin_unlock()
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 13:31:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yw1xoaezmjj4.fsf@unicorn.mansr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151112123123.GZ17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (Peter Zijlstra's message of "Thu, 12 Nov 2015 13:31:23 +0100")
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> writes:
> Hi
>
> I think the MIPS arch_spin_unlock() is borken.
>
> spin_unlock() must have RELEASE semantics, these require that no LOADs
> nor STOREs leak out from the critical section.
>
> From what I know MIPS has a relaxed memory model which allows reads to
> pass stores, and as implemented arch_spin_unlock() only issues a wmb
> which doesn't order prior reads vs later stores.
This is correct.
> Therefore upgrade the wmb() to smp_mb().
>
> (Also, why the unconditional wmb, as opposed to smp_wmb() ?)
Good question.
The current MIPS asm/barrier.h uses a plain SYNC instruction for all
kinds of barriers (except on Cavium Octeon), which is a bit wasteful.
A MIPS implementation can optionally support partial barriers (load,
store, acquire, release) which all behave like a full barrier if not
implemented, so those really ought to be used.
> Maybe-Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> ---
> diff --git a/arch/mips/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/mips/include/asm/spinlock.h
> index 40196bebe849..b2ca13f06152 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/include/asm/spinlock.h
> +++ b/arch/mips/include/asm/spinlock.h
> @@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ static inline void arch_spin_lock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> static inline void arch_spin_unlock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> {
> unsigned int serving_now = lock->h.serving_now + 1;
> - wmb();
> + smp_mb();
> lock->h.serving_now = (u16)serving_now;
> nudge_writes();
> }
All this weirdness was added in commit 500c2e1f:
MIPS: Optimize spinlocks.
The current locking mechanism uses a ll/sc sequence to release a
spinlock. This is slower than a wmb() followed by a store to unlock.
The branching forward to .subsection 2 on sc failure slows down the
contended case. So we get rid of that part too.
Since we are now working on naturally aligned u16 values, we can get
rid of a masking operation as the LHU already does the right thing.
The ANDI are reversed for better scheduling on multi-issue CPUs
On a 12 CPU 750MHz Octeon cn5750 this patch improves ipv4 UDP packet
forwarding rates from 3.58*10^6 PPS to 3.99*10^6 PPS, or about 11%.
Signed-off-by: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>
To: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Patchwork: http://patchwork.linux-mips.org/patch/937/
Signed-off-by: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
--
Måns Rullgård
mans@mansr.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-12 13:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-12 12:31 Peter Zijlstra
2015-11-12 12:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-11-12 13:31 ` Måns Rullgård [this message]
2015-11-12 14:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-11-12 14:50 ` Måns Rullgård
2015-11-12 14:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-11-12 17:46 ` David Daney
2015-11-12 18:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-11-12 18:13 ` Måns Rullgård
2015-11-12 18:17 ` David Daney
2016-01-27 9:57 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2016-01-27 11:43 ` Will Deacon
2016-01-27 12:41 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2016-01-28 1:11 ` Boqun Feng
2016-01-27 14:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-27 15:21 ` Will Deacon
2016-01-27 23:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-01-28 9:57 ` Will Deacon
2016-01-28 22:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-01-29 9:59 ` Will Deacon
2016-01-29 10:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-02-01 13:56 ` Will Deacon
2016-02-02 3:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-02-02 5:19 ` Boqun Feng
2016-02-02 6:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-02-02 8:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-02-02 8:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-02-02 9:34 ` Boqun Feng
2016-02-02 17:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-02-02 17:51 ` Will Deacon
2016-02-02 18:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-02-02 19:30 ` Will Deacon
2016-02-02 19:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-02-03 19:13 ` Will Deacon
2016-02-03 8:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-02-03 13:32 ` Will Deacon
2016-02-03 19:03 ` Will Deacon
2016-02-09 11:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-02-09 11:42 ` Will Deacon
2016-02-02 12:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-02-02 17:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-02-02 22:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-02-02 14:49 ` Ralf Baechle
2016-02-02 14:54 ` Måns Rullgård
2016-02-02 14:58 ` Ralf Baechle
2016-02-02 15:51 ` Måns Rullgård
2016-02-02 17:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-02-02 22:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-02-02 11:45 ` Will Deacon
2016-02-02 12:12 ` Boqun Feng
2016-02-02 12:20 ` Will Deacon
2016-02-02 13:18 ` Boqun Feng
2016-02-02 17:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-02-02 17:37 ` Will Deacon
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=yw1xoaezmjj4.fsf@unicorn.mansr.com \
--to=mans@mansr.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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®