[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <cover.1308259496.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 14:40:47 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>
Subject: [PATCH RFC 0/7] x86: convert ticketlocks to C and remove duplicate code
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>
Hi all,
I'm proposing this series for 3[.0].1.
This is a repost of a series to clean up the x86 ticket lock
code by converting it to a mostly C implementation and removing
lots of duplicate code relating to the ticket size.
The last time I posted this series, the only significant comments
were from Nick Piggin, specifically relating to:
1. A wrongly placed barrier on unlock (which may have allowed the
compiler to move things out of the locked region. I went
belt-and-suspenders by having two barriers to prevent motion
into or out of the locked region.
2. With NR_CPUS < 256 the ticket size is 8 bits. The compiler doesn't
use the same trick as the hand-coded asm to directly compare the high
and low bytes in the word, but does a bit of extra shuffling around.
However, the Intel optimisation guide and several x86 experts have
opined that its best to avoid the high-byte operations anyway, since
they will cause a partial word stall, and the gcc-generated code should
be better.
Overall the compiler-generated code is very similar to the hand-coded
versions, with the partial byte operations being the only significant
difference. (Curiously, gcc does generate a high-byte compare for me
in trylock, so it can if it wants to.)
I've been running with this code in place for several months on 4 core
systems without any problems.
I couldn't measure a consistent performance difference between the two
implemenations; there seemed to be +/- ~1% +/-, which is the level of
variation I see from simply recompiling the kernel with slightly
different code alignment.
Overall, I think the large reduction in code size is a big win.
Thanks,
J
Jeremy Fitzhardinge (7):
x86/ticketlock: clean up types and accessors
x86/ticketlock: convert spin loop to C
x86/ticketlock: Use C for __ticket_spin_unlock
x86/ticketlock: make large and small ticket versions of spin_lock the
same
x86/ticketlock: make __ticket_spin_lock common
x86/ticketlock: make __ticket_spin_trylock common
x86/ticketlock: prevent memory accesses from reordered out of lock
region
arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h | 147 ++++++++++++---------------------
arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock_types.h | 22 +++++-
2 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 95 deletions(-)
--
1.7.5.4
--
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