Both spin locks and write locks currently do:
f0 0f b1 17 lock cmpxchg %edx,(%rdi)
85 c0 test %eax,%eax
75 05 jne [slowpath]
This 'test' insn is superfluous; the cmpxchg insn sets the Z flag
appropriately. Peter pointed out that using atomic_try_cmpxchg_acquire()
will let the compiler know this is true. Comparing before/after
disassemblies show the only effect is to remove this insn.
Take this opportunity to make the spin & write lock code resemble each
other more closely and have similar likely() hints.
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180820162639.GC25153@bombadil.infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
While this prior commit:
54cf809b95 ("locking,qspinlock: Fix spin_is_locked() and spin_unlock_wait()")
... fixes spin_is_locked() and spin_unlock_wait() for the usage
in ipc/sem and netfilter, it does not in fact work right for the
usage in task_work and futex.
So while the 2 locks crossed problem:
spin_lock(A) spin_lock(B)
if (!spin_is_locked(B)) spin_unlock_wait(A)
foo() foo();
... works with the smp_mb() injected by both spin_is_locked() and
spin_unlock_wait(), this is not sufficient for:
flag = 1;
smp_mb(); spin_lock()
spin_unlock_wait() if (!flag)
// add to lockless list
// iterate lockless list
... because in this scenario, the store from spin_lock() can be delayed
past the load of flag, uncrossing the variables and loosing the
guarantee.
This patch reworks spin_is_locked() and spin_unlock_wait() to work in
both cases by exploiting the observation that while the lock byte
store can be delayed, the contender must have registered itself
visibly in other state contained in the word.
It also allows for architectures to override both functions, as PPC
and ARM64 have an additional issue for which we currently have no
generic solution.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@suse.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v4.2 and later
Fixes: 54cf809b95 ("locking,qspinlock: Fix spin_is_locked() and spin_unlock_wait()")
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Similar to commits:
51d7d5205d ("powerpc: Add smp_mb() to arch_spin_is_locked()")
d86b8da04d ("arm64: spinlock: serialise spin_unlock_wait against concurrent lockers")
qspinlock suffers from the fact that the _Q_LOCKED_VAL store is
unordered inside the ACQUIRE of the lock.
And while this is not a problem for the regular mutual exclusive
critical section usage of spinlocks, it breaks creative locking like:
spin_lock(A) spin_lock(B)
spin_unlock_wait(B) if (!spin_is_locked(A))
do_something() do_something()
In that both CPUs can end up running do_something at the same time,
because our _Q_LOCKED_VAL store can drop past the spin_unlock_wait()
spin_is_locked() loads (even on x86!!).
To avoid making the normal case slower, add smp_mb()s to the less used
spin_unlock_wait() / spin_is_locked() side of things to avoid this
problem.
Reported-and-tested-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Reported-by: Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v4.2 and later
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
This patch introduces a new generic queued spinlock implementation that
can serve as an alternative to the default ticket spinlock. Compared
with the ticket spinlock, this queued spinlock should be almost as fair
as the ticket spinlock. It has about the same speed in single-thread
and it can be much faster in high contention situations especially when
the spinlock is embedded within the data structure to be protected.
Only in light to moderate contention where the average queue depth
is around 1-3 will this queued spinlock be potentially a bit slower
due to the higher slowpath overhead.
This queued spinlock is especially suit to NUMA machines with a large
number of cores as the chance of spinlock contention is much higher
in those machines. The cost of contention is also higher because of
slower inter-node memory traffic.
Due to the fact that spinlocks are acquired with preemption disabled,
the process will not be migrated to another CPU while it is trying
to get a spinlock. Ignoring interrupt handling, a CPU can only be
contending in one spinlock at any one time. Counting soft IRQ, hard
IRQ and NMI, a CPU can only have a maximum of 4 concurrent lock waiting
activities. By allocating a set of per-cpu queue nodes and used them
to form a waiting queue, we can encode the queue node address into a
much smaller 24-bit size (including CPU number and queue node index)
leaving one byte for the lock.
Please note that the queue node is only needed when waiting for the
lock. Once the lock is acquired, the queue node can be released to
be used later.
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Daniel J Blueman <daniel@numascale.com>
Cc: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Cc: Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hp.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1429901803-29771-2-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hp.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
