linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@huawei.com>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com>,
	Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Miao Xie <miaoxie@huawei.com>,
	Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>, <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] bit_spinlock: introduce smp_cond_load_relaxed
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 09:45:42 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e31a6864-823b-ac6e-2223-88fa3888502e@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181105224654.GA25864@brain-police>

Hi Will,

On 2018/11/6 6:49, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Gao,
> 
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 02:04:41PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
>> It is better to use wrapped smp_cond_load_relaxed
>> instead of open-coded busy waiting for bit_spinlock.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@huawei.com>
>> ---
>>
>> change log v2:
>>  - fix the incorrect expression !(VAL >> (bitnum & (BITS_PER_LONG-1)))
>>  - the test result is described in the following reply.
> Please include the results in the commit message, so that this change is
> justified.

Will add in the next version...

> 
> This appears to introduce a bunch of overhead for the uncontended fastpath.
> How about the much-simpler-but-completely-untested (tm) patch below?

Actually I thought to do like the following (much simpler indeed) at first...

But the current implementation of smp_cond_load_relaxed will do a judgement immediately
which seems unnecessary (right after the test_and_set_bit_lock rather than after
__cmpwait_relaxed...)
        for (;;) {							\
		VAL = READ_ONCE(*__PTR);				\
		if (cond_expr)						\
			break;						\
		__cmpwait_relaxed(__PTR, VAL);				\
	}								\

p.s. I have no idea the original uncontended fastpath really works effectively...
some idea about this? Thanks in advance...


Thanks,
Gao Xiang


> 
> Will
> 
> --->8
> 
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h b/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h
> index 3ae021368f48..9de8d3544630 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/bitops/lock.h
> @@ -6,6 +6,15 @@
>  #include <linux/compiler.h>
>  #include <asm/barrier.h>
>  
> +static inline void spin_until_bit_unlock(unsigned int nr,
> +					 volatile unsigned long *p)
> +{
> +	unsigned long mask = BIT_MASK(bitnum);
> +
> +	p += BIT_WORD(nr);
> +	smp_cond_load_relaxed(p, VAL & mask);
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * test_and_set_bit_lock - Set a bit and return its old value, for lock
>   * @nr: Bit to set
> diff --git a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h
> index bbc4730a6505..d711c62e718c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h
> @@ -26,9 +26,7 @@ static inline void bit_spin_lock(int bitnum, unsigned long *addr)
>  #if defined(CONFIG_SMP) || defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK)
>  	while (unlikely(test_and_set_bit_lock(bitnum, addr))) {
>  		preempt_enable();
> -		do {
> -			cpu_relax();
> -		} while (test_bit(bitnum, addr));
> +		spin_until_bit_unlock(bitnum, addr);
>  		preempt_disable();
>  	}
>  #endif

  reply	other threads:[~2018-11-06  1:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-13  6:47 [RFC PATCH] bit_spinlock: introduce smp_cond_load_relaxed Gao Xiang
2018-10-13  7:04 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-10-13  7:22   ` Gao Xiang
2018-10-13  7:30     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-10-13  7:44       ` Gao Xiang
2018-10-13  7:30     ` Gao Xiang
2018-10-30  6:04 ` [PATCH v2] " Gao Xiang
2018-10-30  5:52   ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-05 17:11     ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-05 22:49   ` Will Deacon
2018-11-06  1:45     ` Gao Xiang [this message]
2018-11-06  9:06     ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-06 10:22       ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-06 11:00         ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-06 11:36           ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-06 12:27             ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-06 12:33               ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-06 12:38                 ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-06 12:43                 ` Peter Zijlstra

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=e31a6864-823b-ac6e-2223-88fa3888502e@huawei.com \
    --to=gaoxiang25@huawei.com \
    --cc=chao@kernel.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=kstewart@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miaoxie@huawei.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pombredanne@nexb.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.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 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).