All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@gmail.com>
To: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] db: disable the ARM assembler mutex code
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 15:03:11 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJ86T=WRTcXsWs3V32RC0dTNG-F7va_5m-hd6zYQ6aF6YZcxdw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMKF1srPwWebGHZcmnV5vaNhRgSjrp2DG0CgT44zyUqfnFBf_A@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 1:01 PM Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 12:24 PM, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 12:12 PM Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 9:40 AM, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On 6/14/18 5:10 AM, Herve Jourdain wrote:
>> >> >> Hi,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I believe I solved that same problem by just adding, in the case of
>> >> >> armv8
>> >> >> (which I believe may be the new architecture you're referring to):
>> >> >> MUTEX_armv8 = ""
>> >> >> This way, it allows previous versions to work just like they did
>> >> >> before,
>> >> >> without having to disable ARM assembler mutex code for architectures
>> >> >> that
>> >> >> support it correctly - up to armv7ve I believe.
>> >> >> Of course, we might need to also have a good definition for armv8,
>> >> >> which is
>> >> >> the object of another thread.
>> >> >
>> >> > right thats a better approach.
>> >>
>> >> SWP is not guaranteed to work on SMP systems... and even if it does,
>> >> performance is likely to be worse than the pthreads version (which can
>> >> take advantage of the newer instructions).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> https://community.arm.com/processors/b/blog/posts/locks-swps-and-two-smoking-barriers
>> >>
>> >> In general, use of hand optimised assembler mutex implementations in
>> >> user space isn't something to be encouraged - use pthreads (or maybe a
>> >> gcc intrinsic) instead.
>> >>
>> >
>> > question is about disabling it on old arm machines, do we have data
>> > where
>> > we know that other sync methods without swp works better on armv5 and
>> > lower ?
>>
>> On armv5 and below a hand optimised implementation using SWP is likely
>> to be faster than pthreads. No one is suggesting otherwise.
>>
>> On SMP (highly likely nowadays for armv7 and above), SWP simply might
>> not work (aside from the fact that if it does work, it's likely to be
>> slower than pthreads). It's not really a question of performance
>> there, so the proposal to only disable SWP for armv8 doesn't seem like
>> a safe solution.
>
> Suggestion is not to just do it for armv8 but
> To keep it there where its beneficial

You can always argue that micro optimisations are beneficial. The
question is whether they make a big enough difference in some real
world use case to be worth the maintenance effort.

>> Using pthreads unconditionally is safe and easy. Unless you can prove
>> that hand optimised SWP is really a big win for armv5 (is anyone
>> really running a performance critical database on an armv5 system?)
>> why not keep the recipe simple and use pthreads everywhere?
>>
>> >> I think the original patch is good.
>> >>
>> >> >> Cheers,
>> >> >> Herve
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> >> From: openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org
>> >> >> [mailto:openembedded-core-bounces@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf
>> >> >> Of
>> >> >> Ovidiu Panait
>> >> >> Sent: jeudi 14 juin 2018 13:55
>> >> >> To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> >> >> Subject: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] db: disable the ARM assembler mutex
>> >> >> code
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The swpb in macro MUTEX_SET will cause "undefined instruction" error
>> >> >> on the
>> >> >> new arm arches which don't support this assembly instruction any
>> >> >> more. If
>> >> >> use ldrex/strex to replace swpb, the old arm arches don't support
>> >> >> them. So
>> >> >> to avoid this issue, just disable the ARM assembler mutex code, and
>> >> >> use the
>> >> >> default pthreads mutex.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Signed-off-by: Li Zhou <li.zhou@windriver.com>
>> >> >> Signed-off-by: Catalin Enache <catalin.enache@windriver.com>
>> >> >> Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait <ovidiu.panait@windriver.com>
>> >> >> ---
>> >> >>  meta/recipes-support/db/db_5.3.28.bb | 13 +------------
>> >> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/db/db_5.3.28.bb
>> >> >> b/meta/recipes-support/db/db_5.3.28.bb
>> >> >> index 093ee44909..15b4155a29 100644
>> >> >> --- a/meta/recipes-support/db/db_5.3.28.bb
>> >> >> +++ b/meta/recipes-support/db/db_5.3.28.bb
>> >> >> @@ -59,18 +59,7 @@ FILES_SOLIBSDEV = "${libdir}/libdb.so
>> >> >> ${libdir}/libdb_cxx.so"
>> >> >>  # All the --disable-* options replace --enable-smallbuild, which
>> >> >> breaks a
>> >> >> bunch of stuff (eg. postfix)  DB5_CONFIG ?= "--enable-o_direct
>> >> >> --disable-cryptography --disable-queue --disable-replication
>> >> >> --disable-verify --disable-compat185 --disable-sql"
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -EXTRA_OECONF = "${DB5_CONFIG} --enable-shared --enable-cxx
>> >> >> --with-sysroot"
>> >> >> -
>> >> >> -# Override the MUTEX setting here, the POSIX library is -# the
>> >> >> default -
>> >> >> "POSIX/pthreads/library".
>> >> >> -# Don't ignore the nice SWP instruction on the ARM:
>> >> >> -# These enable the ARM assembler mutex code, this won't -# work
>> >> >> with thumb
>> >> >> compilation...
>> >> >> -ARM_MUTEX = "--with-mutex=ARM/gcc-assembly"
>> >> >> -MUTEX = ""
>> >> >> -MUTEX_arm = "${ARM_MUTEX}"
>> >> >> -MUTEX_armeb = "${ARM_MUTEX}"
>> >> >> -EXTRA_OECONF += "${MUTEX} STRIP=true"
>> >> >> +EXTRA_OECONF = "${DB5_CONFIG} --enable-shared --enable-cxx
>> >> >> --with-sysroot
>> >> >> STRIP=true"
>> >> >>  EXTRA_OEMAKE += "LIBTOOL='./${HOST_SYS}-libtool'"
>> >> >>
>> >> >>  EXTRA_AUTORECONF += "--exclude=autoheader  -I ${S}/dist/aclocal
>> >> >> -I${S}/dist/aclocal_java"
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> 2.17.1
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Openembedded-core mailing list
>> >> >> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> >> >> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Openembedded-core mailing list
>> >> > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> >> > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>> >> >


  reply	other threads:[~2018-06-14 22:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-06-14 11:55 [PATCH 1/1] db: disable the ARM assembler mutex code Ovidiu Panait
2018-06-14 12:10 ` Herve Jourdain
2018-06-14 16:40   ` Khem Raj
2018-06-14 19:12     ` Andre McCurdy
2018-06-14 19:24       ` Khem Raj
2018-06-14 20:01         ` Andre McCurdy
2018-06-14 21:48           ` Khem Raj
2018-06-14 22:03             ` Andre McCurdy [this message]
2018-06-15  7:10               ` Herve Jourdain
2018-06-15  7:39                 ` Andre McCurdy
2018-06-15 10:41                   ` Herve Jourdain
2018-06-15 14:42                     ` Khem Raj
2018-06-15 16:28                     ` Andre McCurdy

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='CAJ86T=WRTcXsWs3V32RC0dTNG-F7va_5m-hd6zYQ6aF6YZcxdw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=armccurdy@gmail.com \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=raj.khem@gmail.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.