[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180405170706.GC4082@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 19:07:06 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
mingo@...nel.org, boqun.feng@...il.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
catalin.marinas@....com, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] locking/qspinlock: Remove unbounded cmpxchg loop
from locking slowpath
On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 05:58:59PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> The qspinlock locking slowpath utilises a "pending" bit as a simple form
> of an embedded test-and-set lock that can avoid the overhead of explicit
> queuing in cases where the lock is held but uncontended. This bit is
> managed using a cmpxchg loop which tries to transition the uncontended
> lock word from (0,0,0) -> (0,0,1) or (0,0,1) -> (0,1,1).
>
> Unfortunately, the cmpxchg loop is unbounded and lockers can be starved
> indefinitely if the lock word is seen to oscillate between unlocked
> (0,0,0) and locked (0,0,1). This could happen if concurrent lockers are
> able to take the lock in the cmpxchg loop without queuing and pass it
> around amongst themselves.
>
> This patch fixes the problem by unconditionally setting _Q_PENDING_VAL
> using atomic_fetch_or,
Of course, LL/SC or cmpxchg implementations of fetch_or do not in fact
get anything from this ;-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists