[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <10d3a11a-8591-e49d-e010-867a05078ff0@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2023 11:29:02 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] locking/qspinlock: Fix state-transition changes in
comments
On 5/6/23 02:29, Qiuxu Zhuo wrote:
> 1. There may be concurrent locker CPUs to set the qspinlock pending bit.
>
> The first CPU (called pending CPU) of these CPUs sets the pending
> bit to make the state transition (the qspinlock pending bit is set):
>
> 0,0,* -> 0,1,*
>
> The rest of these CPUs are queued to the MCS queue to make the state
> transition (the qspinlock tail is updated):
>
> 0,1,* -> *,1,*
>
> The pending CPU waits until the locker owner goes away to make
> the state transition (the qspinlock locked field is set to zero):
>
> *,1,* -> *,1,0
>
> The pending CPU takes the ownership and clears the pending bit
> to make the state transition:
>
> *,1,0 -> *,0,1
>
> 2. The header of the MCS queue takes the ownership and calls set_locked()
> to make the state transition:
>
> *,*,0 -> *,*,1
That is not true. The pending bit owner has priority over the MCS queue
head. So the pending bit must be 0 before the MCS queue head can take
over the lock. So
*,0,0 -> *,0,1
>
> Fix the state-transition changes above in the code comments accordingly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@...el.com>
> ---
> kernel/locking/qspinlock.c | 10 ++++++----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> index ebe6b8ec7cb3..efebbf19f887 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> @@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ static __always_inline u32 queued_fetch_set_pending_acquire(struct qspinlock *lo
> * set_locked - Set the lock bit and own the lock
> * @lock: Pointer to queued spinlock structure
> *
> - * *,*,0 -> *,0,1
> + * *,*,0 -> *,*,1
set_locked() can only be called when it is sure that the pending bit
isn't set.
> */
> static __always_inline void set_locked(struct qspinlock *lock)
> {
> @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ void __lockfunc queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
> /*
> * trylock || pending
> *
> - * 0,0,* -> 0,1,* -> 0,0,1 pending, trylock
> + * 0,0,* -> 0,1,* -> ... -> *,0,1 pending, trylock
By the time trylock is done, there may be entries in the queue. However,
I doubt it helps by adding "..." in between possible multiple transitions.
> */
> val = queued_fetch_set_pending_acquire(lock);
>
> @@ -358,6 +358,8 @@ void __lockfunc queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
> * Undo and queue; our setting of PENDING might have made the
> * n,0,0 -> 0,0,0 transition fail and it will now be waiting
> * on @next to become !NULL.
> + *
> + * 0,1,* -> *,1,*
There is already a "n,0,0 -> 0,0,0" above, adding a new one may just
confuse people.
> */
> if (unlikely(val & ~_Q_LOCKED_MASK)) {
>
> @@ -371,7 +373,7 @@ void __lockfunc queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
> /*
> * We're pending, wait for the owner to go away.
> *
> - * 0,1,1 -> *,1,0
> + * *,1,* -> *,1,0
This refers to the wait loop. We don't need to wait if the owner has gone.
> *
> * this wait loop must be a load-acquire such that we match the
> * store-release that clears the locked bit and create lock
> @@ -385,7 +387,7 @@ void __lockfunc queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
> /*
> * take ownership and clear the pending bit.
> *
> - * 0,1,0 -> 0,0,1
> + * *,1,0 -> *,0,1
That is the part that we can make the change in the transition diagram
as noted.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists