All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, mingo@kernel.org, will@kernel.org
Cc: oleg@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
	juri.lelli@redhat.com, williams@redhat.com, bristot@redhat.com,
	dave@stgolabs.net, jack@suse.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] locking/percpu-rwsem: Remove the embedded rwsem
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 08:50:11 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ee75fc38-c3c8-3f9e-13ba-5c8312d61325@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191113102855.925208237@infradead.org>

On 11/13/19 5:21 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> +static int percpu_rwsem_wake_function(struct wait_queue_entry *wq_entry,
> +				      unsigned int mode, int wake_flags,
> +				      void *key)
> +{
> +	struct task_struct *p = get_task_struct(wq_entry->private);
> +	bool reader = wq_entry->flags & WQ_FLAG_CUSTOM;
> +	struct percpu_rw_semaphore *sem = key;
> +
> +	/* concurrent against percpu_down_write(), can get stolen */
> +	if (!__percpu_rwsem_trylock(sem, reader))
> +		return 1;
> +
> +	list_del_init(&wq_entry->entry);
> +	smp_store_release(&wq_entry->private, NULL);
> +
> +	wake_up_process(p);
> +	put_task_struct(p);
> +
> +	return !reader; /* wake 'all' readers and 1 writer */
> +}
> +
> +static void percpu_rwsem_wait(struct percpu_rw_semaphore *sem, bool reader)
> +{
> +	DEFINE_WAIT_FUNC(wq_entry, percpu_rwsem_wake_function);
> +	bool wait;
> +
> +	spin_lock_irq(&sem->waiters.lock);
> +	/*
> +	 * Serialize against the wakeup in percpu_up_write(), if we fail
> +	 * the trylock, the wakeup must see us on the list.
> +	 */
> +	wait = !__percpu_rwsem_trylock(sem, reader);
> +	if (wait) {
> +		wq_entry.flags |= WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE | reader * WQ_FLAG_CUSTOM;
> +		__add_wait_queue_entry_tail(&sem->waiters, &wq_entry);
> +	}
> +	spin_unlock_irq(&sem->waiters.lock);
> +
> +	while (wait) {
> +		set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> +		if (!smp_load_acquire(&wq_entry.private))
> +			break;
> +		schedule();
> +	}

If I read the function correctly, you are setting the WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE
for both readers and writers and __wake_up() is called with an exclusive
count of one. So only one reader or writer is woken up each time.
However, the comment above said we wake 'all' readers and 1 writer. That
doesn't match the actual code, IMO. To match the comments, you should
have set WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE flag only on writer. In this case, you
probably don't need WQ_FLAG_CUSTOM to differentiate between readers and
writers.

Cheers,
Longman


  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-11-19 13:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-11-13 10:21 [PATCH 0/5] locking: Percpu-rwsem rewrite Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-13 10:21 ` [PATCH 1/5] locking/percpu-rwsem, lockdep: Make percpu-rwsem use its own lockdep_map Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-15 20:39   ` Davidlohr Bueso
2020-01-08  1:33     ` [PATCH] locking/percpu-rwsem: Add might_sleep() for writer locking Davidlohr Bueso
2020-01-08  1:33       ` Davidlohr Bueso
2020-02-11 12:48       ` [tip: locking/core] " tip-bot2 for Davidlohr Bueso
2019-11-13 10:21 ` [PATCH 2/5] locking/percpu-rwsem: Convert to bool Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-13 10:21 ` [PATCH 3/5] locking/percpu-rwsem: Move __this_cpu_inc() into the slowpath Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-13 10:21 ` [PATCH 4/5] locking/percpu-rwsem: Extract __percpu_down_read_trylock() Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-18 16:28   ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-11-13 10:21 ` [PATCH 5/5] locking/percpu-rwsem: Remove the embedded rwsem Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-18 19:53   ` Davidlohr Bueso
2019-11-18 23:19     ` Davidlohr Bueso
2019-12-17 10:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-17 10:35     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-18 21:52   ` Waiman Long
2019-12-17 10:28     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-19 13:50   ` Waiman Long [this message]
2019-11-19 15:58     ` Oleg Nesterov
2019-11-19 16:28       ` Waiman Long
2019-12-17 10:26       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-17 10:28         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-15 17:14 ` [PATCH 0/5] locking: Percpu-rwsem rewrite Juri Lelli

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=ee75fc38-c3c8-3f9e-13ba-5c8312d61325@redhat.com \
    --to=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=bristot@redhat.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=jack@suse.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=williams@redhat.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.