From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0ACFC7618B for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:26:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94E21217F4 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:26:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390593AbfGYQ0m (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 12:26:42 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41407 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2387917AbfGYQ0k (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 12:26:40 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 748D330B9BF6; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:26:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from llong.remote.csb (dhcp-17-160.bos.redhat.com [10.18.17.160]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D89BC1017E3F; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:26:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH-tip] locking/rwsem: Make handoff writer optimistically spin on owner To: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Will Deacon , Thomas Gleixner , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso , Linus Torvalds , Tim Chen , huang ying References: <20190625143913.24154-1-longman@redhat.com> From: Waiman Long Organization: Red Hat Message-ID: Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 12:26:37 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190625143913.24154-1-longman@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.46]); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:26:40 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 6/25/19 10:39 AM, Waiman Long wrote: > When the handoff bit is set by a writer, no other tasks other than > the setting writer itself is allowed to acquire the lock. If the > to-be-handoff'ed writer goes to sleep, there will be a wakeup latency > period where the lock is free, but no one can acquire it. That is less > than ideal. > > To reduce that latency, the handoff writer will now optimistically spin > on the owner if it happens to be a on-cpu writer. It will spin until > it releases the lock and the to-be-handoff'ed writer can then acquire > the lock immediately without any delay. Of course, if the owner is not > a on-cpu writer, the to-be-handoff'ed writer will have to sleep anyway. > > The optimistic spinning code is also modified to not stop spinning > when the handoff bit is set. This will prevent an occasional setting of > handoff bit from causing a bunch of optimistic spinners from entering > into the wait queue causing significant reduction in throughput. > > On a 1-socket 22-core 44-thread Skylake system, the AIM7 shared_memory > workload was run with 7000 users. The throughput (jobs/min) of the > following kernels were as follows: > > 1) 5.2-rc6 > - 8,092,486 > 2) 5.2-rc6 + tip's rwsem patches > - 7,567,568 > 3) 5.2-rc6 + tip's rwsem patches + this patch > - 7,954,545 > > Using perf-record(1), the %cpu time used by rwsem_down_write_slowpath(), > rwsem_down_write_failed() and their callees for the 3 kernels were 1.70%, > 5.46% and 2.08% respectively. > > Signed-off-by: Waiman Long > --- > kernel/locking/rwsem.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem.c > index 37524a47f002..5e022fbdb2bb 100644 > --- a/kernel/locking/rwsem.c > +++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem.c > @@ -720,11 +720,12 @@ rwsem_spin_on_owner(struct rw_semaphore *sem, unsigned long nonspinnable) > > rcu_read_lock(); > for (;;) { > - if (atomic_long_read(&sem->count) & RWSEM_FLAG_HANDOFF) { > - state = OWNER_NONSPINNABLE; > - break; > - } > - > + /* > + * When a waiting writer set the handoff flag, it may spin > + * on the owner as well. Once that writer acquires the lock, > + * we can spin on it. So we don't need to quit even when the > + * handoff bit is set. > + */ > new = rwsem_owner_flags(sem, &new_flags); > if ((new != owner) || (new_flags != flags)) { > state = rwsem_owner_state(new, new_flags, nonspinnable); > @@ -970,6 +971,13 @@ static inline bool rwsem_reader_phase_trylock(struct rw_semaphore *sem, > { > return false; > } > + > +static inline int > +rwsem_spin_on_owner(struct rw_semaphore *sem, unsigned long nonspinnable) > +{ > + return 0; > +} > +#define OWNER_NULL 1 > #endif > > /* > @@ -1190,6 +1198,18 @@ rwsem_down_write_slowpath(struct rw_semaphore *sem, int state) > > raw_spin_unlock_irq(&sem->wait_lock); > > + /* > + * After setting the handoff bit and failing to acquire > + * the lock, attempt to spin on owner to accelerate lock > + * transfer. If the previous owner is a on-cpu writer and it > + * has just released the lock, OWNER_NULL will be returned. > + * In this case, we attempt to acquire the lock again > + * without sleeping. > + */ > + if ((wstate == WRITER_HANDOFF) && > + (rwsem_spin_on_owner(sem, 0) == OWNER_NULL)) > + goto trylock_again; > + > /* Block until there are no active lockers. */ > for (;;) { > if (signal_pending_state(state, current)) > @@ -1224,7 +1244,7 @@ rwsem_down_write_slowpath(struct rw_semaphore *sem, int state) > break; > } > } > - > +trylock_again: > raw_spin_lock_irq(&sem->wait_lock); > } > __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING); Any comment on this patch? Cheers, Longman