[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0bb90a87-e03d-2b14-0e58-bd0f41bf84a9@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:28:17 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, bhelgaas@...gle.com
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, eranian@...gle.com,
peterz@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] pci: Allow lockless access path to PCI mmconfig
On 03/02/17 15:21, Andi Kleen wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
>
> The Intel uncore driver can do a lot of PCI config accesses to read
> performance counters. I had a situation on a 4S system where it
> was spending 40+% of CPU time grabbing the pci_cfg_lock due to that.
>
> For 64bit x86 with MMCONFIG there isn't really any reason to take
> a lock. The access is directly mapped to an underlying MMIO area,
> which can fully operate lockless.
>
> Add a new flag that allows the PCI mid layer to skip the lock
> and set it for the 64bit mmconfig code.
>
> There's a small risk that someone relies on this lock for synchronization,
> but I think that's unlikely because there isn't really any useful
> synchronization at this individual operation level. Any useful
> synchronization would likely need to protect at least a
> read-modify-write or similar. So I made it unconditional without opt-in.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/pci/mmconfig_64.c | 1 +
> drivers/pci/access.c | 14 ++++++++++----
> include/linux/pci.h | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/mmconfig_64.c b/arch/x86/pci/mmconfig_64.c
> index bea52496aea6..8bf10f41e626 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/pci/mmconfig_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/pci/mmconfig_64.c
> @@ -121,6 +121,7 @@ int __init pci_mmcfg_arch_init(void)
> }
>
> raw_pci_ext_ops = &pci_mmcfg;
> + pci_root_ops.ll_allowed = true;
>
"ll_allowed" is pretty awful naming... you spend almost all the
characters telling us nothing. I spend several seconds trying to figure
out what "ll" stood for, and without the context of the patch I'd have
had to go a massive grep. Just call it "lockless" or something.
-hpa
Powered by blists - more mailing lists