linux-kernel - [PATCH tip/locking/core v9 2/6] locking/qspinlock: prefetch next node cacheline

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: <1446247597-61863-3-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
Date:	Fri, 30 Oct 2015 19:26:33 -0400
From:	Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@....com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Scott J Norton <scott.norton@....com>,
	Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@....com>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
	Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@....com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/locking/core v9 2/6] locking/qspinlock: prefetch next node cacheline

A queue head CPU, after acquiring the lock, will have to notify
the next CPU in the wait queue that it has became the new queue
head. This involves loading a new cacheline from the MCS node of the
next CPU. That operation can be expensive and add to the latency of
locking operation.

This patch addes code to optmistically prefetch the next MCS node
cacheline if the next pointer is defined and it has been spinning
for the MCS lock for a while. This reduces the locking latency and
improves the system throughput.

Using a locking microbenchmark on a Haswell-EX system, this patch
can improve throughput by about 5%.

Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@....com>
---
 kernel/locking/qspinlock.c |   21 +++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
index 7868418..c1c8a1a 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
@@ -396,6 +396,7 @@ queue:
 	 * p,*,* -> n,*,*
 	 */
 	old = xchg_tail(lock, tail);
+	next = NULL;
 
 	/*
 	 * if there was a previous node; link it and wait until reaching the
@@ -407,6 +408,16 @@ queue:
 
 		pv_wait_node(node);
 		arch_mcs_spin_lock_contended(&node->locked);
+
+		/*
+		 * While waiting for the MCS lock, the next pointer may have
+		 * been set by another lock waiter. We optimistically load
+		 * the next pointer & prefetch the cacheline for writing
+		 * to reduce latency in the upcoming MCS unlock operation.
+		 */
+		next = READ_ONCE(node->next);
+		if (next)
+			prefetchw(next);
 	}
 
 	/*
@@ -426,6 +437,15 @@ queue:
 		cpu_relax();
 
 	/*
+	 * If the next pointer is defined, we are not tail anymore.
+	 * In this case, claim the spinlock & release the MCS lock.
+	 */
+	if (next) {
+		set_locked(lock);
+		goto mcs_unlock;
+	}
+
+	/*
 	 * claim the lock:
 	 *
 	 * n,0,0 -> 0,0,1 : lock, uncontended
@@ -458,6 +478,7 @@ queue:
 	while (!(next = READ_ONCE(node->next)))
 		cpu_relax();
 
+mcs_unlock:
 	arch_mcs_spin_unlock_contended(&next->locked);
 	pv_kick_node(lock, next);
 
-- 
1.7.1

--
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/