From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 14/16] locking/rwsem: Guard against making count negative
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:39:16 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57620139-92a3-4a21-56bd-5d6fff23214f@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190419131522.GW14281@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 04/19/2019 09:15 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 03:03:04PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 02:02:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 12:26:47PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> I thought of a horrible horrible alternative:
>>> Hurm, that's broken as heck. Let me try again.
>> So I can't make that scheme work, it all ends up wanting to have
>> cmpxchg().
>>
>> Do we have a performance comparison somewhere of xadd vs cmpxchg
>> readers? I tried looking in the old threads, but I can't seem to locate
>> it.
>>
>> We need new instructions :/ Or more clever than I can muster just now.
> In particular, an (unsigned) saturation arithmetic variant of XADD would
> be very nice to have at this point.
I just want to clear about my current scheme. There will be 16 bits
allocated for reader count. I use the MS bit for signaling that there
are too many readers. So the fast path will fail and the readers will be
put into the wait list. This effectively limit readers to 32k-1, but it
doesn't mean the actual reader count cannot go over that. As long as the
actual count is less than 64k, everything should still work perfectly.
IOW, even though we have reached the limit of 32k, we need to pile on an
additional 32k readers to really overflow the count and cause problem.
Cheers,
Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-19 19:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 112+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-13 17:22 [PATCH v4 00/16] locking/rwsem: Rwsem rearchitecture part 2 Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 01/16] locking/rwsem: Prevent unneeded warning during locking selftest Waiman Long
2019-04-18 8:04 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 02/16] locking/rwsem: Make owner available even if !CONFIG_RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 03/16] locking/rwsem: Remove rwsem_wake() wakeup optimization Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 04/16] locking/rwsem: Implement a new locking scheme Waiman Long
2019-04-16 13:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-16 13:32 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-16 14:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-16 14:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 05/16] locking/rwsem: Merge rwsem.h and rwsem-xadd.c into rwsem.c Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 06/16] locking/rwsem: Code cleanup after files merging Waiman Long
2019-04-16 16:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-16 16:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-16 19:45 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 07/16] locking/rwsem: Implement lock handoff to prevent lock starvation Waiman Long
2019-04-16 14:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-16 20:26 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-16 21:07 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-17 7:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 16:22 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-16 15:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-16 16:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-16 18:41 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-16 18:16 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-16 18:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 7:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 16:35 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-17 8:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 16:39 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-18 8:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 8:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 08/16] locking/rwsem: Make rwsem_spin_on_owner() return owner state Waiman Long
2019-04-17 9:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 16:42 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-17 10:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 16:53 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-17 12:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 12:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 18:29 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-18 8:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 13:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 18:50 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 09/16] locking/rwsem: Ensure an RT task will not spin on reader Waiman Long
2019-04-17 13:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 18:47 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-18 8:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-18 13:27 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 10/16] locking/rwsem: Wake up almost all readers in wait queue Waiman Long
2019-04-16 16:50 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2019-04-16 17:37 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-17 13:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 17:16 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 11/16] locking/rwsem: Enable readers spinning on writer Waiman Long
2019-04-17 13:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 17:34 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-18 8:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-18 14:35 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-17 13:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 17:45 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-18 9:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-18 13:40 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-17 14:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-17 17:51 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-18 9:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-18 14:37 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 12/16] locking/rwsem: Enable time-based spinning on reader-owned rwsem Waiman Long
2019-04-18 13:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-18 15:15 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-19 7:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-19 14:33 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-19 15:36 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 13/16] locking/rwsem: Add more rwsem owner access helpers Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 14/16] locking/rwsem: Guard against making count negative Waiman Long
2019-04-18 13:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-18 14:08 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-18 14:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-18 14:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-18 14:54 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-19 10:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-19 12:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-19 13:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-19 13:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-19 19:39 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2019-04-21 21:07 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-23 14:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-23 14:31 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-23 16:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-23 19:12 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-23 19:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-23 19:41 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-23 19:55 ` [PATCH] bpf: Fix preempt_enable_no_resched() abuse Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-23 20:03 ` [PATCH] trace: " Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-23 23:58 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-04-29 6:39 ` [tip:sched/core] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-29 13:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-04-29 14:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-23 20:27 ` [PATCH] bpf: " Linus Torvalds
2019-04-23 20:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-23 20:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-24 13:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-25 21:23 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-04-26 7:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-24 7:09 ` [PATCH v4 14/16] locking/rwsem: Guard against making count negative Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-24 16:49 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-24 17:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-24 17:10 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-24 17:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 15/16] locking/rwsem: Merge owner into count on x86-64 Waiman Long
2019-04-18 14:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-18 14:40 ` Waiman Long
2019-04-13 17:22 ` [PATCH v4 16/16] locking/rwsem: Remove redundant computation of writer lock word Waiman Long
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=57620139-92a3-4a21-56bd-5d6fff23214f@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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
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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).