From: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
To: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>,
Matthew R Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/6] MCS Lock: Restructure the MCS lock defines and locking code into its own file
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 21:34:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGQ1y=5RnRsWdOe5CX6WYEJ2vUCFtHpj+PNC85NuEDH4bMdb0w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130928021947.GF9093@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Paul E. McKenney
<paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 04:54:06PM -0700, Jason Low wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Paul E. McKenney
>> <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> > Yep. The previous lock holder's smp_wmb() won't keep either the compiler
>> > or the CPU from reordering things for the new lock holder. They could for
>> > example reorder the critical section to precede the node->locked check,
>> > which would be very bad.
>>
>> Paul, Tim, Longman,
>>
>> How would you like the proposed changes below?
>
> Could you point me at what this applies to? I can find flaws looking
> at random pieces, given a little luck, but at some point I need to look
> at the whole thing. ;-)
Sure. Here is a link to the patch we are trying to modify:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/25/532
Also, below is what the mcs_spin_lock() and mcs_spin_unlock()
functions would look like after applying the proposed changes.
static noinline
void mcs_spin_lock(struct mcs_spin_node **lock, struct mcs_spin_node *node)
{
struct mcs_spin_node *prev;
/* Init node */
node->locked = 0;
node->next = NULL;
prev = xchg(lock, node);
if (likely(prev == NULL)) {
/* Lock acquired. No need to set node->locked since it
won't be used */
return;
}
ACCESS_ONCE(prev->next) = node;
/* Wait until the lock holder passes the lock down */
while (!ACCESS_ONCE(node->locked))
arch_mutex_cpu_relax();
smp_mb();
}
static void mcs_spin_unlock(struct mcs_spin_node **lock, struct
mcs_spin_node *node)
{
struct mcs_spin_node *next = ACCESS_ONCE(node->next);
if (likely(!next)) {
/*
* Release the lock by setting it to NULL
*/
if (cmpxchg(lock, node, NULL) == node)
return;
/* Wait until the next pointer is set */
while (!(next = ACCESS_ONCE(node->next)))
arch_mutex_cpu_relax();
}
smp_wmb();
ACCESS_ONCE(next->locked) = 1;
}
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-28 4:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <cover.1380144003.git.tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
2013-09-25 22:10 ` [PATCH v6 0/6] rwsem: performance optimizations Tim Chen
2013-09-25 22:10 ` [PATCH v6 1/6] rwsem: check the lock before cpmxchg in down_write_trylock Tim Chen
2013-09-25 22:10 ` [PATCH v6 2/6] rwsem: remove 'out' label in do_wake Tim Chen
2013-09-25 22:10 ` [PATCH v6 3/6] rwsem: remove try_reader_grant label do_wake Tim Chen
2013-09-25 22:10 ` [PATCH v6 4/6] rwsem/wake: check lock before do atomic update Tim Chen
2013-09-25 22:10 ` [PATCH v6 5/6] MCS Lock: Restructure the MCS lock defines and locking code into its own file Tim Chen
2013-09-26 6:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-09-26 8:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-26 9:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-09-26 18:18 ` Tim Chen
2013-09-26 19:27 ` Jason Low
2013-09-26 20:06 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-09-26 20:23 ` Jason Low
2013-09-26 20:40 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-09-26 21:09 ` Jason Low
2013-09-26 21:41 ` Tim Chen
2013-09-26 22:42 ` Jason Low
2013-09-26 22:57 ` Tim Chen
2013-09-27 6:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-09-27 6:26 ` Jason Low
2013-09-27 11:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-27 13:44 ` Joe Perches
2013-09-27 13:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-27 14:05 ` Joe Perches
2013-09-27 14:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-27 14:14 ` [PATCH] checkpatch: Make the memory barrier test noisier Joe Perches
2013-09-27 14:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-27 14:34 ` Joe Perches
2013-09-27 14:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-27 15:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-27 15:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-27 16:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-27 23:40 ` Oliver Neukum
2013-09-28 7:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-27 16:12 ` [PATCH v6 5/6] MCS Lock: Restructure the MCS lock defines and locking code into its own file Jason Low
2013-09-27 16:19 ` Tim Chen
2013-10-02 19:19 ` Waiman Long
2013-10-02 19:30 ` Jason Low
2013-10-02 19:37 ` Waiman Long
2013-09-26 22:22 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-09-27 15:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-27 18:09 ` Tim Chen
2013-09-28 2:58 ` Waiman Long
2013-09-27 19:38 ` Tim Chen
2013-09-27 20:16 ` Jason Low
2013-09-27 20:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-27 22:46 ` Tim Chen
2013-09-27 23:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-27 23:54 ` Jason Low
2013-09-28 0:02 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-09-28 2:19 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-28 4:34 ` Jason Low [this message]
2013-09-30 15:51 ` Waiman Long
2013-09-30 16:10 ` Jason Low
2013-09-30 16:36 ` Waiman Long
2013-10-01 16:48 ` Tim Chen
2013-10-01 20:01 ` Waiman Long
2013-10-01 21:16 ` Tim Chen
2013-10-02 1:25 ` Waiman Long
2013-10-02 18:43 ` Tim Chen
2013-10-02 19:32 ` Waiman Long
2013-09-30 16:28 ` Tim Chen
2013-09-25 22:10 ` [PATCH v6 6/6] rwsem: do optimistic spinning for writer lock acquisition Tim Chen
2013-09-26 6:53 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAGQ1y=5RnRsWdOe5CX6WYEJ2vUCFtHpj+PNC85NuEDH4bMdb0w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.shi@linaro.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=davidlohr.bueso@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=walken@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox