loongarch.lists.linux.dev archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>
To: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@loongson.cn>,
	loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
	 linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	Xuefeng Li <lixuefeng@loongson.cn>,
	 Xuerui Wang <kernel@xen0n.name>,
	Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com>,
	 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: Add qspinlock support
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 10:11:38 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJF2gTRjZ=YaAMVgZGCAFWDRGUZ-XT9MAw52LM_VJBsxAYsCEA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAhV-H51Hd7ZAY55-F+nMc1Wb=q=4G07CT-C+=3=BX1_3hw0Ng@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 8:59 AM Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 12:01 AM Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Huacai & Arnd,
> >
> > Please have a look at riscv qspinlock V5:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/a498a2ff-2503-b25c-53c9-55f5f2480bf6@microchip.com/T/#t
> From my point of view, we can simply drop RISCV_USE_QUEUED_SPINLOCKS,
> unless ticket spinlock is better than qspinlock in the !NUMA case.
RISC-V ISA has a flexible LR/SC forward guarantee definition, which
means some processors still must stay in ticket-lock.

Loongarch should give out the info about how strong your LR/SC forward
guarantee is. If some versions of the processor do strong guarantee,
but some don't. Maybe you should consider the RISC-V style.

>
> Huacai
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 5:50 PM Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 12:11 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Jun 19, 2022 at 5:48 PM Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 1:40 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 1:19 AM Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > static inline u32 arch_xchg32(u32 *ptr, u32 x) {...}
> > > > > > > > static inline u64 arch_xchg64(u64 *ptr, u64 x) {...}
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
> > > > > > > > #define xchg(ptr, x) (sizeof(*ptr) == 8) ? \
> > > > > > > >             arch_xchg64((u64*)ptr, (uintptr_t)x)  \
> > > > > > > >             arch_xchg32((u32*)ptr, x)
> > > > > > > > #else
> > > > > > > > #define xchg(ptr, x) arch_xchg32((u32*)ptr, (uintptr_t)x)
> > > > > > > > #endif
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The above primitive implies only long & int type args are permitted, right?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The idea is to allow any scalar or pointer type, but not structures or
> > > > > > unions. If we need to deal with those as well, the macro could be extended
> > > > > > accordingly, but I would prefer to limit it as much as possible.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is already cmpxchg64(), which is used for types that are fixed to
> > > > > > 64 bit integers even on 32-bit architectures, but it is rarely used except
> > > > > > to implement the atomic64_t helpers.
> > > > > A lot of 32bit arches couldn't provide cmpxchg64 (like arm's ldrexd/strexd).
> > > >
> > > > Most 32-bit architectures also lack SMP support, so they can fall back to
> > > > the generic version from include/asm-generic/cmpxchg-local.h
> > > >
> > > > > Another question: Do you know why arm32 didn't implement
> > > > > HAVE_CMPXCHG_DOUBLE with ldrexd/strexd?
> > > >
> > > > I think it's just fairly obscure, the slub code appears to be the only
> > > > code that would use it.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 80% of the uses of cmpxchg() and xchg() deal with word-sized
> > > > > > quantities like 'unsigned long', or 'void *', but the others are almost
> > > > > > all fixed 32-bit quantities. We could change those to use cmpxchg32()
> > > > > > directly and simplify the cmpxchg() function further to only deal
> > > > > > with word-sized arguments, but I would not do that in the first step.
> > > > > Don't forget cmpxchg_double for this cleanup, when do you want to
> > > > > restart the work?
> > > >
> > > > I have no specific plans at the moment. If you or someone else likes
> > > > to look into it, I can dig out my old patch though.
> > > >
> > > > The cmpxchg_double() call seems to already fit in, since it is an
> > > > inline function and does not expect arbitrary argument types.
> > > Thank all of you. :)
> > >
> > > As Rui and Xuerui said, ll and sc in LoongArch both have implicit full
> > > barriers, so there is no "relaxed" version.
> > >
> > > The __WEAK_LLSC_MB in __cmpxchg_small() have nothing to do with ll and
> > >  sc themselves, we need a barrier at the branch target just because
> > > Loongson-3A5000 has a hardware flaw (and will be fixed in
> > > Loongson-3A6000).
> > >
> > > qspinlock just needs xchg_small(), but cmpxchg_small() is also useful
> > > for percpu operations. So I plan to split this patch to two: the first
> > > add xchg_small() and cmpxchg_small(), the second enable qspinlock.
> > >
> > > Huacai
> > >
> > > >
> > > >        Arnd
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards
> >  Guo Ren
> >
> > ML: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-csky/
> >



-- 
Best Regards
 Guo Ren

ML: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-csky/

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-21  2:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-17 14:57 [PATCH] LoongArch: Add qspinlock support Huacai Chen
2022-06-17 16:10 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-06-17 17:45   ` Guo Ren
2022-06-17 18:59     ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-06-17 23:19       ` Guo Ren
2022-06-18  5:40         ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-06-19 15:48           ` Guo Ren
2022-06-19 16:10             ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-06-20  9:49               ` Huacai Chen
2022-06-20 16:00                 ` Guo Ren
2022-06-21  0:59                   ` Huacai Chen
2022-06-21  2:11                     ` Guo Ren [this message]
2022-06-18 12:50     ` WANG Xuerui
2022-06-19  4:28       ` hev
2022-06-19 15:06         ` Guo Ren
2022-06-19 15:38           ` hev
2022-06-19 15:23   ` Guo Ren
2022-06-17 16:35 ` Guo Ren

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='CAJF2gTRjZ=YaAMVgZGCAFWDRGUZ-XT9MAw52LM_VJBsxAYsCEA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=guoren@kernel.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
    --cc=chenhuacai@loongson.cn \
    --cc=jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com \
    --cc=kernel@xen0n.name \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lixuefeng@loongson.cn \
    --cc=loongarch@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=will@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).