| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CACvQF521Q_bwEFYXRBTbH1yquPdoOydOWHvvtvp2cGa-N8EP1A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:15:49 +0800
From: Lai Jiangshan <eag0628@...il.com>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Waiman Long <waiman.long@...com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...e.hu, dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, josh@...htriplett.org,
niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, dhowells@...hat.com,
edumazet@...gle.com, darren@...art.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
sbw@....edu, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC ticketlock] Auto-queued ticketlock
Hi, Paul
I have some question about smp_mb().(searching smp_mb() can find all
my question)
Thanks,
Lai
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Paul E. McKenney
<paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 02:41:59PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 06/11/2013 12:36 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> >
>> >>I am a bit concern about the size of the head queue table itself.
>> >>RHEL6, for example, had defined CONFIG_NR_CPUS to be 4096 which mean
>> >>a table size of 256. Maybe it is better to dynamically allocate the
>> >>table at init time depending on the actual number of CPUs in the
>> >>system.
>> >But if your kernel is built for 4096 CPUs, the 32*256=8192 bytes of memory
>> >is way down in the noise. Systems that care about that small an amount
>> >of memory probably have a small enough number of CPUs that they can just
>> >turn off queueing at build time using CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED=n, right?
>>
>> My concern is more about the latency on the table scan than the
>> actual memory that was used.
>>
>> >>>+/*
>> >>>+ * Return a pointer to the queue header associated with the specified lock,
>> >>>+ * or return NULL if there is no queue for the lock or if the lock's queue
>> >>>+ * is in transition.
>> >>>+ */
>> >>>+static struct tkt_q_head *tkt_q_find_head(arch_spinlock_t *asp)
>> >>>+{
>> >>>+ int i;
>> >>>+ int start;
>> >>>+
>> >>>+ start = i = tkt_q_hash(asp);
>> >>>+ do
>> >>>+ if (tkt_q_heads[i].ref == asp)
>> >>>+ return&tkt_q_heads[i];
>> >>>+ while ((i = tkt_q_next_slot(i)) != start);
>> >>>+ return NULL;
>> >>>+}
>> >>With a table size of 256 and you have to scan the whole table to
>> >>find the right head queue. This can be a significant overhead. I
>> >>will suggest setting a limiting of how many entries it scans before
>> >>it aborts rather than checking the whole table.
>> >But it will scan 256 entries only if there are 256 other locks in queued
>> >mode, which is -very- unlikely, even given 4096 CPUs. That said, if you
>> >show me that this results in a real latency problem on a real system,
>> >I would be happy to provide a way to limit the search.
>>
>> Looking at the code more carefully, the chance of actually scanning
>> 256 entries is very small. However, I now have some concern on the
>> way you set up the initial queue.
>>
>> +/*
>> + * Start handling a period of high contention by finding a queue to associate
>> + * with this lock. Returns true if successful (in which case we hold the
>> + * lock) and false otherwise (in which case we do -not- hold the lock).
>> + */
>> +bool tkt_q_start_contend(arch_spinlock_t *asp, struct __raw_tickets inc)
>> +{
>> + int i;
>> + int start;
>> +
>> + /* Hash the lock address to find a starting point. */
>> + start = i = tkt_q_hash(asp);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Each pass through the following loop attempts to associate
>> + * the lock with the corresponding queue.
>> + */
>> + do {
>> + /*
>> + * Use 0x1 to mark the queue in use, but also avoiding
>> + * any spinners trying to use it before we get it all
>> + * initialized.
>> + */
>> + if (cmpxchg(&tkt_q_heads[i].ref,
>> + NULL,
>> + (arch_spinlock_t *)0x1) == NULL) {
>> +
>> + /* Succeeded, now go initialize it. */
>> + return tkt_q_init_contend(i, asp, inc);
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* If someone beat us to it, go spin on their queue. */
>> + if (ACCESS_ONCE(asp->tickets.head)& 0x1)
>> + return tkt_q_do_spin(asp, inc);
>> + } while ((i = tkt_q_next_slot(i)) != start);
>> +
>> + /* All the queues are in use, revert to spinning on the ticket lock. */
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> +
>>
>> Unconditional cmpxchg() can be a source of high contention by
>> itself. Considering that 16 threads may be doing cmpxchg() more or
>> less simultaneously on the same cache line, it can cause a lot of
>> contention. It will be better if you check to see if tkt_q_heads[i]
>> is NULL first before doing cmpxchg.
>>
>> Another point is that the 16 threads maybe setting up the queues in
>> consecutive slots in the head table. This is both a source of
>> contention and a waste of effort. One possible solution is to add
>> one more field (set to cpuid + 1, for example) to indicate that that
>> setup is being done with asp set to the target lock address
>> immediately. We will need to use cmpxchg128() for 64-bit machine,
>> though. Another solution is to have only that thread with ticket
>> number that is a fixed distance from head (e.g. 16*2) to do the
>> queue setup while the rest wait until the setup is done before
>> spinning on the queue.
>>
>> As my colleague Davidlohr had reported there are more regressions
>> than performance improvement in the AIM7 benchmark. I believe that
>> queue setup contention is likely a source of performance regression.
>
> Please see below for a v3 patch that:
>
> 1. Fixes cpu_relax().
>
> 2. Tests before doing cmpxchg().
>
> 3. Reduces the number of CPUs attempting to set up the queue,
> in the common case, to a single CPU. (Multiple CPUs can
> still be trying to set up the queue given unfortunate
> sequences of concurrent ticket-lock handoffs.)
>
> Please let me know how it goes!
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ticketlock: Add queued-ticketlock capability
>
> Breaking up locks is better than implementing high-contention locks, but
> if we must have high-contention locks, why not make them automatically
> switch between light-weight ticket locks at low contention and queued
> locks at high contention? After all, this would remove the need for
> the developer to predict which locks will be highly contended.
>
> This commit allows ticket locks to automatically switch between pure
> ticketlock and queued-lock operation as needed. If too many CPUs are
> spinning on a given ticket lock, a queue structure will be allocated
> and the lock will switch to queued-lock operation. When the lock becomes
> free, it will switch back into ticketlock operation. The low-order bit
> of the head counter is used to indicate that the lock is in queued mode,
> which forces an unconditional mismatch between the head and tail counters.
> This approach means that the common-case code path under conditions of
> low contention is very nearly that of a plain ticket lock.
>
> A fixed number of queueing structures is statically allocated in an
> array. The ticket-lock address is used to hash into an initial element,
> but if that element is already in use, it moves to the next element. If
> the entire array is already in use, continue to spin in ticket mode.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> [ paulmck: Eliminate duplicate code and update comments (Steven Rostedt). ]
> [ paulmck: Address Eric Dumazet review feedback. ]
> [ paulmck: Use Lai Jiangshan idea to eliminate smp_mb(). ]
> [ paulmck: Expand ->head_tkt from s32 to s64 (Waiman Long). ]
> [ paulmck: Move cpu_relax() to main spin loop (Steven Rostedt). ]
> [ paulmck: Reduce queue-switch contention (Waiman Long). ]
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
> index 33692ea..509c51a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h
> @@ -34,6 +34,21 @@
> # define UNLOCK_LOCK_PREFIX
> #endif
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED
> +
> +#define __TKT_SPIN_INC 2
> +bool tkt_spin_pass(arch_spinlock_t *ap, struct __raw_tickets inc);
> +
> +#else /* #ifdef CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED */
> +
> +#define __TKT_SPIN_INC 1
> +static inline bool tkt_spin_pass(arch_spinlock_t *ap, struct __raw_tickets inc)
> +{
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED */
> +
> /*
> * Ticket locks are conceptually two parts, one indicating the current head of
> * the queue, and the other indicating the current tail. The lock is acquired
> @@ -49,17 +64,16 @@
> */
> static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_lock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> {
> - register struct __raw_tickets inc = { .tail = 1 };
> + register struct __raw_tickets inc = { .tail = __TKT_SPIN_INC };
>
> inc = xadd(&lock->tickets, inc);
> -
> for (;;) {
> - if (inc.head == inc.tail)
> + if (inc.head == inc.tail || tkt_spin_pass(lock, inc))
> break;
> cpu_relax();
> inc.head = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets.head);
> }
> - barrier(); /* make sure nothing creeps before the lock is taken */
> + barrier(); /* Make sure nothing creeps in before the lock is taken. */
> }
>
> static __always_inline int __ticket_spin_trylock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> @@ -70,17 +84,37 @@ static __always_inline int __ticket_spin_trylock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> if (old.tickets.head != old.tickets.tail)
> return 0;
>
> +#ifndef CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED
> new.head_tail = old.head_tail + (1 << TICKET_SHIFT);
> +#else /* #ifndef CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED */
> + new.head_tail = old.head_tail + (2 << TICKET_SHIFT);
> +#endif /* #else #ifndef CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED */
>
> /* cmpxchg is a full barrier, so nothing can move before it */
> return cmpxchg(&lock->head_tail, old.head_tail, new.head_tail) == old.head_tail;
> }
>
> +#ifndef CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED
> +
> static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_unlock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> {
> __add(&lock->tickets.head, 1, UNLOCK_LOCK_PREFIX);
> }
>
> +#else /* #ifndef CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED */
> +
> +extern void tkt_q_do_wake(arch_spinlock_t *lock);
> +
> +static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_unlock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> +{
> + __ticket_t head = 2;
> +
> + head = xadd(&lock->tickets.head, head);
> + if (head & 0x1)
> + tkt_q_do_wake(lock);
> +}
> +#endif /* #else #ifndef CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED */
> +
> static inline int __ticket_spin_is_locked(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> {
> struct __raw_tickets tmp = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets);
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock_types.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock_types.h
> index ad0ad07..cdaefdd 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock_types.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock_types.h
> @@ -7,12 +7,18 @@
>
> #include <linux/types.h>
>
> -#if (CONFIG_NR_CPUS < 256)
> +#if (CONFIG_NR_CPUS < 128)
> typedef u8 __ticket_t;
> typedef u16 __ticketpair_t;
> -#else
> +#define TICKET_T_CMP_GE(a, b) (UCHAR_MAX / 2 >= (unsigned char)((a) - (b)))
> +#elif (CONFIG_NR_CPUS < 32768)
> typedef u16 __ticket_t;
> typedef u32 __ticketpair_t;
> +#define TICKET_T_CMP_GE(a, b) (USHRT_MAX / 2 >= (unsigned short)((a) - (b)))
> +#else
> +typedef u32 __ticket_t;
> +typedef u64 __ticketpair_t;
> +#define TICKET_T_CMP_GE(a, b) (UINT_MAX / 2 >= (unsigned int)((a) - (b)))
> #endif
>
> #define TICKET_SHIFT (sizeof(__ticket_t) * 8)
> @@ -21,7 +27,11 @@ typedef struct arch_spinlock {
> union {
> __ticketpair_t head_tail;
> struct __raw_tickets {
> +#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__
> + __ticket_t tail, head;
> +#else /* #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ */
> __ticket_t head, tail;
> +#endif /* #else #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ */
> } tickets;
> };
> } arch_spinlock_t;
> diff --git a/include/linux/kernel.h b/include/linux/kernel.h
> index e9ef6d6..816a87c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kernel.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kernel.h
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
> #include <asm/byteorder.h>
> #include <uapi/linux/kernel.h>
>
> +#define UCHAR_MAX ((u8)(~0U))
> #define USHRT_MAX ((u16)(~0U))
> #define SHRT_MAX ((s16)(USHRT_MAX>>1))
> #define SHRT_MIN ((s16)(-SHRT_MAX - 1))
> diff --git a/kernel/Kconfig.locks b/kernel/Kconfig.locks
> index 44511d1..900c0f0 100644
> --- a/kernel/Kconfig.locks
> +++ b/kernel/Kconfig.locks
> @@ -223,3 +223,38 @@ endif
> config MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER
> def_bool y
> depends on SMP && !DEBUG_MUTEXES
> +
> +config TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED
> + bool "Dynamically switch between ticket and queued locking"
> + depends on SMP
> + default n
> + ---help---
> + Enable dynamic switching between ticketlock and queued locking
> + on a per-lock basis. This option will slow down low-contention
> + acquisition and release very slightly (additional conditional
> + in release path), but will provide more efficient operation at
> + high levels of lock contention. High-contention operation will
> + not be quite as efficient as would be a pure queued lock, but
> + this dynamic approach consumes less memory than queud locks
> + and also runs faster at low levels of contention.
> +
> + Say "Y" if you are running on a large system with a workload
> + that is likely to result in high levels of contention.
> +
> + Say "N" if you are unsure.
> +
> +config TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED_SWITCH
> + int "When to switch from ticket to queued locking"
> + depends on TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED
> + default 8
> + range 3 32
> + ---help---
> + Specify how many tasks should be spinning on the lock before
> + switching to queued mode. Systems with low-latency memory/cache
> + interconnects will prefer larger numbers, while extreme low-latency
> + and real-time workloads will prefer a smaller number. Of course,
> + extreme real-time workloads would be even happier if contention
> + on the locks were reduced to the point that there was never any
> + need for queued locking in the first place.
> +
> + Take the default if you are unsure.
> diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile
> index 271fd31..70a91f7 100644
> --- a/kernel/Makefile
> +++ b/kernel/Makefile
> @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ endif
> obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) += spinlock.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED) += tktqlock.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_UID16) += uid16.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_MODULES) += module.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_MODULE_SIG) += module_signing.o modsign_pubkey.o modsign_certificate.o
> diff --git a/kernel/tktqlock.c b/kernel/tktqlock.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..9f03af0
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/kernel/tktqlock.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,369 @@
> +/*
> + * Queued ticket spinlocks.
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> + * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> + * (at your option) any later version.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
> + * GNU General Public License for more details.
> + *
> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> + * along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> + * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA.
> + *
> + * Copyright IBM Corporation, 2013
> + *
> + * Authors: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> + */
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/spinlock.h>
> +#include <linux/smp.h>
> +#include <linux/percpu.h>
> +
> +struct tkt_q {
> + int cpu;
> + __ticket_t tail;
> + struct tkt_q *next;
> +};
> +
> +struct tkt_q_head {
> + arch_spinlock_t *ref; /* Pointer to spinlock if in use. */
> + s64 head_tkt; /* Head ticket when started queuing. */
> + struct tkt_q *spin; /* Head of queue. */
> + struct tkt_q **spin_tail; /* Tail of queue. */
> +};
> +
> +/*
> + * TKT_Q_SWITCH is twice the number of CPUs that must be spinning on a
> + * given ticket lock to motivate switching to spinning on a queue.
> + * The reason that it is twice the number is because the bottom bit of
> + * the ticket is reserved for the bit that indicates that a queue is
> + * associated with the lock.
> + */
> +#define TKT_Q_SWITCH (CONFIG_TICKET_LOCK_QUEUED_SWITCH * 2)
> +
> +/*
> + * TKT_Q_NQUEUES is the number of queues to maintain. Large systems
> + * might have multiple highly contended locks, so provide more queues for
> + * systems with larger numbers of CPUs.
> + */
> +#define TKT_Q_NQUEUES (DIV_ROUND_UP(NR_CPUS + TKT_Q_SWITCH - 1, TKT_Q_SWITCH) * 2)
> +
> +/* The queues themselves. */
> +struct tkt_q_head tkt_q_heads[TKT_Q_NQUEUES];
> +
> +/* Advance to the next queue slot, wrapping around to the beginning. */
> +static int tkt_q_next_slot(int i)
> +{
> + return (++i < TKT_Q_NQUEUES) ? i : 0;
> +}
> +
> +/* Very crude hash from lock address to queue slot number. */
> +static unsigned long tkt_q_hash(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> +{
> + return (((unsigned long)lock) >> 8) % TKT_Q_NQUEUES;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Return a pointer to the queue header associated with the specified lock,
> + * or return NULL if there is no queue for the lock or if the lock's queue
> + * is in transition.
> + */
> +static struct tkt_q_head *tkt_q_find_head(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> +{
> + int i;
> + int start;
> +
> + start = i = tkt_q_hash(lock);
> + do
> + if (tkt_q_heads[i].ref == lock)
> + return &tkt_q_heads[i];
> + while ((i = tkt_q_next_slot(i)) != start);
> + return NULL;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Try to stop queuing, reverting back to normal ticket-lock operation.
> + * We can only stop queuing when the queue is empty, which means that
> + * we need to correctly handle races where someone shows up in the queue
> + * just as we are trying to dispense with the queue. They win, we lose.
> + */
> +static bool tkt_q_try_unqueue(arch_spinlock_t *lock, struct tkt_q_head *tqhp)
> +{
> + arch_spinlock_t asold;
> + arch_spinlock_t asnew;
> +
> + /* Pick up the ticket values. */
> + asold = ACCESS_ONCE(*lock);
> + if ((asold.tickets.head & ~0x1) == asold.tickets.tail) {
> +
> + /* Attempt to mark the lock as not having a queue. */
> + asnew = asold;
> + asnew.tickets.head &= ~0x1;
> + if (cmpxchg(&lock->head_tail,
> + asold.head_tail,
> + asnew.head_tail) == asold.head_tail) {
> +
> + /* Succeeded, mark the queue as unused. */
> + ACCESS_ONCE(tqhp->ref) = NULL;
> + return true;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + /* Failed, tell the caller there is still a queue to pass off to. */
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Hand the lock off to the first CPU on the queue.
> + */
> +void tkt_q_do_wake(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> +{
> + struct tkt_q_head *tqhp;
> + struct tkt_q *tqp;
> +
> + /* If the queue is still being set up, wait for it. */
> + while ((tqhp = tkt_q_find_head(lock)) == NULL)
> + cpu_relax();
> +
> + for (;;) {
> +
> + /* Find the first queue element. */
> + tqp = ACCESS_ONCE(tqhp->spin);
> + if (tqp != NULL)
> + break; /* Element exists, hand off lock. */
> + if (tkt_q_try_unqueue(lock, tqhp))
> + return; /* No element, successfully removed queue. */
> + cpu_relax();
> + }
> + if (ACCESS_ONCE(tqhp->head_tkt) != -1)
> + ACCESS_ONCE(tqhp->head_tkt) = -1;
> + smp_mb(); /* Order pointer fetch and assignment against handoff. */
I just try to find in which arch&case,
there will be wrong if I use barrier() instead.
Is barrier() enough if I want to reduce the overhead for X86?
> + ACCESS_ONCE(tqp->cpu) = -1;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(tkt_q_do_wake);
> +
> +/*
> + * Given a lock that already has a queue associated with it, spin on
> + * that queue. Return false if there was no queue (which means we do not
> + * hold the lock) and true otherwise (meaning we -do- hold the lock).
> + */
> +bool tkt_q_do_spin(arch_spinlock_t *lock, struct __raw_tickets inc)
> +{
> + struct tkt_q **oldtail;
> + struct tkt_q tq;
> + struct tkt_q_head *tqhp;
> +
> + /*
> + * Ensure that accesses to queue header happen after sensing
> + * the lock's have-queue bit.
> + */
> + smp_mb(); /* See above block comment. */
Is barrier() enough if I want to reduce the overhead for X86?
> +
> + /* If there no longer is a queue, leave. */
> + tqhp = tkt_q_find_head(lock);
> + if (tqhp == NULL)
> + return false;
> +
> + /* Initialize our queue element. */
> + tq.cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
> + tq.tail = inc.tail;
> + tq.next = NULL;
> +
> + /* Check to see if we already hold the lock. */
> + if (ACCESS_ONCE(tqhp->head_tkt) == inc.tail) {
> + /* The last holder left before queue formed, we hold lock. */
> + tqhp->head_tkt = -1;
> + return true;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Add our element to the tail of the queue. Note that if the
> + * queue is empty, the ->spin_tail pointer will reference
> + * the queue's head pointer, namely ->spin.
> + */
> + oldtail = xchg(&tqhp->spin_tail, &tq.next);
> + ACCESS_ONCE(*oldtail) = &tq;
> +
> + /* Spin until handoff. */
> + while (ACCESS_ONCE(tq.cpu) != -1)
> + cpu_relax();
> +
> + /*
> + * Remove our element from the queue. If the queue is now empty,
> + * update carefully so that the next acquisition will enqueue itself
> + * at the head of the list. Of course, the next enqueue operation
> + * might be happening concurrently, and this code needs to handle all
> + * of the possible combinations, keeping in mind that the enqueue
> + * operation happens in two stages: (1) update the tail pointer and
> + * (2) update the predecessor's ->next pointer. With this in mind,
> + * the following code needs to deal with three scenarios:
> + *
> + * 1. tq is the last entry. In this case, we use cmpxchg to
> + * point the list tail back to the list head (->spin). If
> + * the cmpxchg fails, that indicates that we are instead
> + * in scenario 2 below. If the cmpxchg succeeds, the next
> + * enqueue operation's tail-pointer exchange will enqueue
> + * the next element at the queue head, because the ->spin_tail
> + * pointer now references the queue head.
> + *
> + * 2. tq is the last entry, and the next entry has updated the
> + * tail pointer but has not yet updated tq.next. In this
> + * case, tq.next is NULL, the cmpxchg will fail, and the
> + * code will wait for the enqueue to complete before completing
> + * removal of tq from the list.
> + *
> + * 3. tq is not the last pointer. In this case, tq.next is non-NULL,
> + * so the following code simply removes tq from the list.
> + */
> + if (tq.next == NULL) {
> +
> + /* Mark the queue empty. */
> + tqhp->spin = NULL;
> +
> + /* Try to point the tail back at the head. */
> + if (cmpxchg(&tqhp->spin_tail,
> + &tq.next,
> + &tqhp->spin) == &tq.next)
> + return true; /* Succeeded, queue is now empty. */
> +
> + /* Failed, if needed, wait for the enqueue to complete. */
> + while (tq.next == NULL)
> + cpu_relax();
> +
> + /* The following code will repair the head. */
> + }
> + smp_mb(); /* Force ordering between handoff and critical section. */
Is barrier() enough if I want to reduce the overhead for X86?
> +
> + /*
> + * Advance list-head pointer. This same task will be the next to
> + * access this when releasing the lock, so no need for a memory
> + * barrier after the following assignment.
> + */
> + ACCESS_ONCE(tqhp->spin) = tq.next;
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Given a lock that does not have a queue, attempt to associate the
> + * i-th queue with it, returning true if successful (meaning we hold
> + * the lock) or false otherwise (meaning we do -not- hold the lock).
> + * Note that the caller has already filled in ->ref with 0x1, so we
> + * own the queue.
> + */
> +static bool
> +tkt_q_init_contend(int i, arch_spinlock_t *lock, struct __raw_tickets inc)
> +{
> + arch_spinlock_t asold;
> + arch_spinlock_t asnew;
> + struct tkt_q_head *tqhp;
> +
> + /* Initialize the i-th queue header. */
> + tqhp = &tkt_q_heads[i];
> + tqhp->spin = NULL;
> + tqhp->spin_tail = &tqhp->spin;
> +
> + /* Each pass through this loop attempts to mark the lock as queued. */
> + do {
> + asold.head_tail = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->head_tail);
> + asnew = asold;
> + if (asnew.tickets.head & 0x1) {
> +
> + /* Someone beat us to it, back out. */
> + smp_mb();
Is this intention not to corrupt the next owner of tqhp by the above
modification of tqhp?
Is smp_wmb() enough?
> + ACCESS_ONCE(tqhp->ref) = NULL;
> +
> + /* Spin on the queue element they set up. */
> + return tkt_q_do_spin(lock, inc);
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Record the head counter in case one of the spinning
> + * CPUs already holds the lock but doesn't realize it yet.
> + */
> + tqhp->head_tkt = asold.tickets.head;
> +
> + /* The low-order bit in the head counter says "queued". */
> + asnew.tickets.head |= 0x1;
> + } while (cmpxchg(&lock->head_tail,
> + asold.head_tail,
> + asnew.head_tail) != asold.head_tail);
> +
> + /* Point the queue at the lock and go spin on it. */
> + ACCESS_ONCE(tqhp->ref) = lock;
> + return tkt_q_do_spin(lock, inc);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Start handling a period of high contention by finding a queue to associate
> + * with this lock. Returns true if successful (in which case we hold the
> + * lock) and false otherwise (in which case we do -not- hold the lock).
> + */
> +bool tkt_q_start_contend(arch_spinlock_t *lock, struct __raw_tickets inc)
> +{
> + int i;
> + int start;
> +
> + /* Hash the lock address to find a starting point. */
> + start = i = tkt_q_hash(lock);
> +
> + /*
> + * Each pass through the following loop attempts to associate
> + * the lock with the corresponding queue.
> + */
> + do {
> + /*
> + * Use 0x1 to mark the queue in use, but also avoiding
> + * any spinners trying to use it before we get it all
> + * initialized.
> + */
> + if (tkt_q_heads[i].ref)
> + continue;
> + if (cmpxchg(&tkt_q_heads[i].ref,
> + NULL,
> + (arch_spinlock_t *)0x1) == NULL) {
> +
> + /* Succeeded, now go initialize it. */
> + return tkt_q_init_contend(i, lock, inc);
> + }
> +
> + /* If someone beat us to it, go spin on their queue. */
> + if (ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets.head) & 0x1)
> + return tkt_q_do_spin(lock, inc);
> + } while ((i = tkt_q_next_slot(i)) != start);
> +
> + /* All the queues are in use, revert to spinning on the ticket lock. */
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +bool tkt_spin_pass(arch_spinlock_t *ap, struct __raw_tickets inc)
> +{
> + if (unlikely(inc.head & 0x1)) {
> +
> + /* This lock has a queue, so go spin on the queue. */
> + if (tkt_q_do_spin(ap, inc))
> + return true;
> +
> + /* Get here if the queue is in transition: Retry next time. */
> +
> + } else if (inc.tail - TKT_Q_SWITCH == inc.head) {
> +
> + /*
> + * This lock has lots of spinners, but no queue.
> + * Go create a queue to spin on.
> + */
> + if (tkt_q_start_contend(ap, inc))
> + return true;
> +
> + /* Get here if the queue is in transition: Retry next time. */
> + }
> +
> + /* Either no need for a queue or the queue is in transition. Spin. */
> + return false;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(tkt_spin_pass);
>
> --
> 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/
--
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