| 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: <1429471060-21271-3-git-send-email-dave@stgolabs.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 12:17:40 -0700
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Chris Mason <clm@...com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
fredrik.markstrom@...driver.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] futex: lockless wakeups
Given the overall futex architecture, any chance of reducing
hb->lock contention is welcome. In this particular case, using
wake-queues to enable lockless wakeups addresses very much real
world performance concerns, even cases of soft-lockups in cases
of large amounts of blocked tasks (which is not hard to find in
large boxes, using but just a handful of futex).
At the lowest level, this patch can reduce latency of a single thread
attempting to acquire hb->lock in highly contended scenarios by a
up to 2x. At lower counts of nr_wake there are no regressions,
confirming, of course, that the wake_q handling overhead is practically
non existent. For instance, while a fair amount of variation,
the extended pef-bench wakeup benchmark shows for a 20 core machine
the following avg per-thread time to wakeup its share of tasks:
nr_thr ms-before ms-after
16 0.0590 0.0215
32 0.0396 0.0220
48 0.0417 0.0182
64 0.0536 0.0236
80 0.0414 0.0097
96 0.0672 0.0152
Naturally, this can cause spurious wakeups. However there is core code
that cannot handle them afaict, and furthermore tglx does have the point
that other events can already trigger them anyway.
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
---
kernel/futex.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++----------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/futex.c b/kernel/futex.c
index 2579e40..f9984c3 100644
--- a/kernel/futex.c
+++ b/kernel/futex.c
@@ -1090,9 +1090,11 @@ static void __unqueue_futex(struct futex_q *q)
/*
* The hash bucket lock must be held when this is called.
- * Afterwards, the futex_q must not be accessed.
+ * Afterwards, the futex_q must not be accessed. Callers
+ * must ensure to later call wake_up_q() for the actual
+ * wakeups to occur.
*/
-static void wake_futex(struct futex_q *q)
+static void mark_wake_futex(struct wake_q_head *wake_q, struct futex_q *q)
{
struct task_struct *p = q->task;
@@ -1100,14 +1102,10 @@ static void wake_futex(struct futex_q *q)
return;
/*
- * We set q->lock_ptr = NULL _before_ we wake up the task. If
- * a non-futex wake up happens on another CPU then the task
- * might exit and p would dereference a non-existing task
- * struct. Prevent this by holding a reference on p across the
- * wake up.
+ * Queue the task for later wakeup for after we've released
+ * the hb->lock. wake_q_add() grabs reference to p.
*/
- get_task_struct(p);
-
+ wake_q_add(wake_q, p);
__unqueue_futex(q);
/*
* The waiting task can free the futex_q as soon as
@@ -1117,9 +1115,6 @@ static void wake_futex(struct futex_q *q)
*/
smp_wmb();
q->lock_ptr = NULL;
-
- wake_up_state(p, TASK_NORMAL);
- put_task_struct(p);
}
static int wake_futex_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, u32 uval, struct futex_q *this)
@@ -1217,6 +1212,7 @@ futex_wake(u32 __user *uaddr, unsigned int flags, int nr_wake, u32 bitset)
struct futex_q *this, *next;
union futex_key key = FUTEX_KEY_INIT;
int ret;
+ WAKE_Q(wake_q);
if (!bitset)
return -EINVAL;
@@ -1244,13 +1240,14 @@ futex_wake(u32 __user *uaddr, unsigned int flags, int nr_wake, u32 bitset)
if (!(this->bitset & bitset))
continue;
- wake_futex(this);
+ mark_wake_futex(&wake_q, this);
if (++ret >= nr_wake)
break;
}
}
spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
+ wake_up_q(&wake_q);
out_put_key:
put_futex_key(&key);
out:
@@ -1269,6 +1266,7 @@ futex_wake_op(u32 __user *uaddr1, unsigned int flags, u32 __user *uaddr2,
struct futex_hash_bucket *hb1, *hb2;
struct futex_q *this, *next;
int ret, op_ret;
+ WAKE_Q(wake_q);
retry:
ret = get_futex_key(uaddr1, flags & FLAGS_SHARED, &key1, VERIFY_READ);
@@ -1320,7 +1318,7 @@ retry_private:
ret = -EINVAL;
goto out_unlock;
}
- wake_futex(this);
+ mark_wake_futex(&wake_q, this);
if (++ret >= nr_wake)
break;
}
@@ -1334,7 +1332,7 @@ retry_private:
ret = -EINVAL;
goto out_unlock;
}
- wake_futex(this);
+ mark_wake_futex(&wake_q, this);
if (++op_ret >= nr_wake2)
break;
}
@@ -1344,6 +1342,7 @@ retry_private:
out_unlock:
double_unlock_hb(hb1, hb2);
+ wake_up_q(&wake_q);
out_put_keys:
put_futex_key(&key2);
out_put_key1:
@@ -1503,6 +1502,7 @@ static int futex_requeue(u32 __user *uaddr1, unsigned int flags,
struct futex_pi_state *pi_state = NULL;
struct futex_hash_bucket *hb1, *hb2;
struct futex_q *this, *next;
+ WAKE_Q(wake_q);
if (requeue_pi) {
/*
@@ -1679,7 +1679,7 @@ retry_private:
* woken by futex_unlock_pi().
*/
if (++task_count <= nr_wake && !requeue_pi) {
- wake_futex(this);
+ mark_wake_futex(&wake_q, this);
continue;
}
@@ -1719,6 +1719,7 @@ retry_private:
out_unlock:
free_pi_state(pi_state);
double_unlock_hb(hb1, hb2);
+ wake_up_q(&wake_q);
hb_waiters_dec(hb2);
/*
--
2.1.4
--
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