[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1266049992-17419-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 10:33:12 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] x86-64, rwsem: Avoid store forwarding hazzard in __downgrade_write
The Intel Architecture Optimization Reference Manual states that a short
load that follows a long store to the same object will suffer a store
forwading penalty, particularly if the two accesses use different addresses.
Trivially, a long load that follows a short store will also suffer a penalty.
__downgrade_write() in rwsem incurs both penalties: the increment operation
will not be able to reuse a recently-loaded rwsem value, and its result will
not be reused by any recently-following rwsem operation.
A comment in the code states that this is because 64-bit immediates are
special and expensive; but while they are slightly special (only a single
instruction allows them), they aren't expensive: a test shows that two loops,
one loading a 32-bit immediate and one loading a 64-bit immediate, both take
1.5 cycles per iteration.
Fix this by changing __downgrade_write to use the same add instruction on
i386 and on x86_64, so that it uses the same operand size as all the other
rwsem functions.
Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
---
v2: use 'e' constraint to avoid #ifdef
arch/x86/include/asm/rwsem.h | 25 +++++--------------------
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/rwsem.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/rwsem.h
index 10204a2..606ede1 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/rwsem.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/rwsem.h
@@ -232,34 +232,19 @@ static inline void __up_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
*/
static inline void __downgrade_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
{
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
-# if RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS != -0x100000000
-# error "This code assumes RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS == -2^32"
-# endif
-
- /* 64-bit immediates are special and expensive, and not needed here */
- asm volatile("# beginning __downgrade_write\n\t"
- LOCK_PREFIX "incl 4(%1)\n\t"
- /* transitions 0xZZZZZZZZ00000001 -> 0xYYYYYYYY00000001 */
- " jns 1f\n\t"
- " call call_rwsem_downgrade_wake\n"
- "1:\n\t"
- "# ending __downgrade_write\n"
- : "+m" (sem->count)
- : "a" (sem)
- : "memory", "cc");
-#else
asm volatile("# beginning __downgrade_write\n\t"
LOCK_PREFIX _ASM_ADD "%2,(%1)\n\t"
- /* transitions 0xZZZZ0001 -> 0xYYYY0001 */
+ /*
+ * transitions 0xZZZZ0001 -> 0xYYYY0001 (i386)
+ * 0xZZZZZZZZ00000001 -> 0xYYYYYYYY00000001 (x86_64)
+ */
" jns 1f\n\t"
" call call_rwsem_downgrade_wake\n"
"1:\n\t"
"# ending __downgrade_write\n"
: "+m" (sem->count)
- : "a" (sem), "i" (-RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)
+ : "a" (sem), "er" (-RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS)
: "memory", "cc");
-#endif
}
/*
--
1.6.5.3
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists