Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org,
	x86@kernel.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] locking/rwsem: Optimize down_read_trylock()
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 13:38:43 -0500
Message-ID: <0dc32b77-9485-0800-695d-1a076923b1e6@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a90fa2cf-f891-d64c-101b-adc81e06e0de@redhat.com>

On 02/12/2019 01:36 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 02/12/2019 08:25 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 02:24:04PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:31:26PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>> Modify __down_read_trylock() to make it generate slightly better code
>>>> (smaller and maybe a tiny bit faster).
>>>>
>>>> Before this patch, down_read_trylock:
>>>>
>>>>    0x0000000000000000 <+0>:     callq  0x5 <down_read_trylock+5>
>>>>    0x0000000000000005 <+5>:     jmp    0x18 <down_read_trylock+24>
>>>>    0x0000000000000007 <+7>:     lea    0x1(%rdx),%rcx
>>>>    0x000000000000000b <+11>:    mov    %rdx,%rax
>>>>    0x000000000000000e <+14>:    lock cmpxchg %rcx,(%rdi)
>>>>    0x0000000000000013 <+19>:    cmp    %rax,%rdx
>>>>    0x0000000000000016 <+22>:    je     0x23 <down_read_trylock+35>
>>>>    0x0000000000000018 <+24>:    mov    (%rdi),%rdx
>>>>    0x000000000000001b <+27>:    test   %rdx,%rdx
>>>>    0x000000000000001e <+30>:    jns    0x7 <down_read_trylock+7>
>>>>    0x0000000000000020 <+32>:    xor    %eax,%eax
>>>>    0x0000000000000022 <+34>:    retq
>>>>    0x0000000000000023 <+35>:    mov    %gs:0x0,%rax
>>>>    0x000000000000002c <+44>:    or     $0x3,%rax
>>>>    0x0000000000000030 <+48>:    mov    %rax,0x20(%rdi)
>>>>    0x0000000000000034 <+52>:    mov    $0x1,%eax
>>>>    0x0000000000000039 <+57>:    retq
>>>>
>>>> After patch, down_read_trylock:
>>>>
>>>>    0x0000000000000000 <+0>:     callq  0x5 <down_read_trylock+5>
>>>>    0x0000000000000005 <+5>:     mov    (%rdi),%rax
>>>>    0x0000000000000008 <+8>:     test   %rax,%rax
>>>>    0x000000000000000b <+11>:    js     0x2f <down_read_trylock+47>
>>>>    0x000000000000000d <+13>:    lea    0x1(%rax),%rdx
>>>>    0x0000000000000011 <+17>:    lock cmpxchg %rdx,(%rdi)
>>>>    0x0000000000000016 <+22>:    jne    0x8 <down_read_trylock+8>
>>>>    0x0000000000000018 <+24>:    mov    %gs:0x0,%rax
>>>>    0x0000000000000021 <+33>:    or     $0x3,%rax
>>>>    0x0000000000000025 <+37>:    mov    %rax,0x20(%rdi)
>>>>    0x0000000000000029 <+41>:    mov    $0x1,%eax
>>>>    0x000000000000002e <+46>:    retq
>>>>    0x000000000000002f <+47>:    xor    %eax,%eax
>>>>    0x0000000000000031 <+49>:    retq
>>>>
>>>> By using a rwsem microbenchmark, the down_read_trylock() rate on a
>>>> x86-64 system before and after the patch were:
>>>>
>>>>                  Before Patch    After Patch
>>>>    # of Threads     rlock           rlock
>>>>    ------------     -----           -----
>>>>         1           27,787          28,259
>>>>         2            8,359           9,234
>>> From 1/2:
>>>
>>> 1        29,201  30,143  29,458    28,615  30,172  29,201
>>> 2         6,807  13,299   1,171     7,725  15,025   1,804
>> Argh, fat fingered and send before I was done typing.
>>
>> What I wanted to say was; those rlock numbers don't match up. What
>> gives?
>>
>> The before _this_ patch number of 27k787 should be the same as the after
>> first patch number of 30k172.
> The rlock number in patch 1 refers to down_read() which uses xadd. The
> number here in patch 2 refers specifically to down_read_trylock() which
> uses cmpxchg() as this patch changes only __down_read_tryulock(). So the
> performance data differ.

You can see that the performance is worse if we use cmpxchg for
down_read instead of using xadd.

Cheers,
Longman

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply index

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-11 19:31 [PATCH v2 0/2] locking/rwsem: Remove arch specific rwsem files Waiman Long
2019-02-11 19:31 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] " Waiman Long
2019-02-11 19:31 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] locking/rwsem: Optimize down_read_trylock() Waiman Long
2019-02-12 13:24   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-12 13:25     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-12 18:36       ` Waiman Long
2019-02-12 18:38         ` Waiman Long [this message]
2019-02-12 19:58   ` Linus Torvalds
2019-02-12 21:21     ` Waiman Long
2019-02-13  7:45       ` Ingo Molnar
2019-02-13 15:33         ` Waiman Long

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=0dc32b77-9485-0800-695d-1a076923b1e6@redhat.com \
    --to=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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

Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/0 linux-arm-kernel/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/1 linux-arm-kernel/git/1.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-arm-kernel linux-arm-kernel/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel \
		linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
	public-inbox-index linux-arm-kernel

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git