linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 03/19] qspinlock: Add pending bit

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20140417154200.GN11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:42:00 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@...com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@...il.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
	Scott J Norton <scott.norton@...com>,
	Chegu Vinod <chegu_vinod@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 03/19] qspinlock: Add pending bit

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:03:55AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> +/**
> + * trylock_pending - try to acquire queue spinlock using the pending bit
> + * @lock : Pointer to queue spinlock structure
> + * @pval : Pointer to value of the queue spinlock 32-bit word
> + * Return: 1 if lock acquired, 0 otherwise
> + */
> +static inline int trylock_pending(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 *pval)
> +{
> +	u32 old, new, val = *pval;

I'm not thrilled about you breaking this into a separate function; the
compiler will put it right back and now you get to have that ugly
pointer stuff.

It also makes the function control flow not match the state diagram
anymore.

> +
> +	/*
> +	 * trylock || pending
> +	 *
> +	 * 0,0,0 -> 0,0,1 ; trylock
> +	 * 0,0,1 -> 0,1,1 ; pending
> +	 */
> +	for (;;) {
> +		/*
> +		 * If we observe any contention; queue.
> +		 */
> +		if (val & ~_Q_LOCKED_MASK)
> +			return 0;
> +
> +		new = _Q_LOCKED_VAL;
> +		if (val == new)
> +			new |= _Q_PENDING_VAL;
> +
> +		old = atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->val, val, new);
> +		if (old == val)
> +			break;
> +
> +		*pval = val = old;
> +	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * we won the trylock
> +	 */
> +	if (new == _Q_LOCKED_VAL)
> +		return 1;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * we're pending, wait for the owner to go away.
> +	 *
> +	 * *,1,1 -> *,1,0
> +	 */
> +	while ((val = atomic_read(&lock->val)) & _Q_LOCKED_MASK)
> +		arch_mutex_cpu_relax();

That was a cpu_relax().

> +
> +	/*
> +	 * take ownership and clear the pending bit.
> +	 *
> +	 * *,1,0 -> *,0,1
> +	 */
> +	for (;;) {
> +		new = (val & ~_Q_PENDING_MASK) | _Q_LOCKED_VAL;
> +
> +		old = atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->val, val, new);
> +		if (old == val)
> +			break;
> +
> +		val = old;
> +	}
> +	return 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/