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: <20210930100514.10121-1-21cnbao@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Sep 2021 18:05:14 +0800
From:   Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
To:     alex.kogan@...cle.com
Cc:     arnd@...db.de, bp@...en8.de, daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com,
        dave.dice@...cle.com, guohanjun@...wei.com, hpa@...or.com,
        jglauber@...vell.com, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux@...linux.org.uk, longman@...hat.com, mingo@...hat.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, steven.sistare@...cle.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, will.deacon@....com, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 3/6] locking/qspinlock: Introduce CNA into the slow path of qspinlock

> +/*
> + * Implement a NUMA-aware version of MCS (aka CNA, or compact NUMA-aware lock).
> + *
> + * In CNA, spinning threads are organized in two queues, a primary queue for
> + * threads running on the same NUMA node as the current lock holder, and a
> + * secondary queue for threads running on other nodes. Schematically, it
> + * looks like this:
> + *
> + *    cna_node
> + *   +----------+     +--------+         +--------+
> + *   |mcs:next  | --> |mcs:next| --> ... |mcs:next| --> NULL  [Primary queue]
> + *   |mcs:locked| -.  +--------+         +--------+
> + *   +----------+  |
> + *                 `----------------------.
> + *                                        v
> + *                 +--------+         +--------+
> + *                 |mcs:next| --> ... |mcs:next|            [Secondary queue]
> + *                 +--------+         +--------+
> + *                     ^                    |
> + *                     `--------------------'
> + *

probably not only related with NUMA, it might be also related with cache topology.
For example, one NUMA might has a couple of sub domains, each domain shares some
last level cache. ZEN, Power and some ARM servers all have this kind of topology.

lock synchronization within this smaller range should be much faster. anyway, it
looks like a good start to be aware of numa only for this moment.

Thanks
barry

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ