linux-kernel - [PATCH 6/6] cpuops: Use cmpxchg for xchg to avoid lock semantics

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 18 Dec 2010 16:24:12 +0100
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	penberg@...helsinki.fi, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	hpa@...or.com, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com
Cc:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 6/6] cpuops: Use cmpxchg for xchg to avoid lock semantics

From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>

Use cmpxchg instead of xchg to realize this_cpu_xchg.

xchg will cause LOCK overhead since LOCK is always implied but cmpxchg
will not.

Baselines:

xchg()		= 18 cycles (no segment prefix, LOCK semantics)
__this_cpu_xchg = 1 cycle

(simulated using this_cpu_read/write, two prefixes. Looks like the
cpu can use loop optimization to get rid of most of the overhead)

Cycles before:

this_cpu_xchg	 = 37 cycles (segment prefix and LOCK (implied by xchg))

After:

this_cpu_xchg	= 11 cycle (using cmpxchg without lock semantics)

Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/percpu.h |   21 +++++++++++++++------
 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/percpu.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/percpu.h
index b85ade5..8ee4516 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/percpu.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/percpu.h
@@ -263,8 +263,9 @@ do {									\
 })
 
 /*
- * Beware: xchg on x86 has an implied lock prefix. There will be the cost of
- * full lock semantics even though they are not needed.
+ * xchg is implemented using cmpxchg without a lock prefix. xchg is
+ * expensive due to the implied lock prefix.  The processor cannot prefetch
+ * cachelines if xchg is used.
  */
 #define percpu_xchg_op(var, nval)					\
 ({									\
@@ -272,25 +273,33 @@ do {									\
 	typeof(var) pxo_new__ = (nval);					\
 	switch (sizeof(var)) {						\
 	case 1:								\
-		asm("xchgb %2, "__percpu_arg(1)				\
+		asm("\n1:mov "__percpu_arg(1)",%%al"			\
+		    "\n\tcmpxchgb %2, "__percpu_arg(1)			\
+		    "\n\tjnz 1b"					\
 			    : "=a" (pxo_ret__), "+m" (var)		\
 			    : "q" (pxo_new__)				\
 			    : "memory");				\
 		break;							\
 	case 2:								\
-		asm("xchgw %2, "__percpu_arg(1)				\
+		asm("\n1:mov "__percpu_arg(1)",%%ax"			\
+		    "\n\tcmpxchgw %2, "__percpu_arg(1)			\
+		    "\n\tjnz 1b"					\
 			    : "=a" (pxo_ret__), "+m" (var)		\
 			    : "r" (pxo_new__)				\
 			    : "memory");				\
 		break;							\
 	case 4:								\
-		asm("xchgl %2, "__percpu_arg(1)				\
+		asm("\n1:mov "__percpu_arg(1)",%%eax"			\
+		    "\n\tcmpxchgl %2, "__percpu_arg(1)			\
+		    "\n\tjnz 1b"					\
 			    : "=a" (pxo_ret__), "+m" (var)		\
 			    : "r" (pxo_new__)				\
 			    : "memory");				\
 		break;							\
 	case 8:								\
-		asm("xchgq %2, "__percpu_arg(1)				\
+		asm("\n1:mov "__percpu_arg(1)",%%rax"			\
+		    "\n\tcmpxchgq %2, "__percpu_arg(1)			\
+		    "\n\tjnz 1b"					\
 			    : "=a" (pxo_ret__), "+m" (var)		\
 			    : "r" (pxo_new__)				\
 			    : "memory");				\
-- 
1.7.1

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/