linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: 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>,
	Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5 08/18] locking/rwsem: Always release wait_lock before waking up tasks
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:46:18 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190418234628.3675-9-longman@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190418234628.3675-1-longman@redhat.com>

With the use of wake_q, we can do task wakeups without holding the
wait_lock. There is one exception in the rwsem code, though. It is
when the writer in the slowpath detects that there are waiters ahead
but the rwsem is not held by a writer. This can lead to a long wait_lock
hold time especially when a large number of readers are to be woken up.

Remediate this situation by releasing the wait_lock before waking up
tasks and re-acquiring it afterward.

Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
---
 include/linux/sched/wake_q.h |  5 +++++
 kernel/locking/rwsem.c       | 27 ++++++++++++++++-----------
 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/sched/wake_q.h b/include/linux/sched/wake_q.h
index ad826d2a4557..26a2013ac39c 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched/wake_q.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched/wake_q.h
@@ -51,6 +51,11 @@ static inline void wake_q_init(struct wake_q_head *head)
 	head->lastp = &head->first;
 }
 
+static inline bool wake_q_empty(struct wake_q_head *head)
+{
+	return head->first == WAKE_Q_TAIL;
+}
+
 extern void wake_q_add(struct wake_q_head *head, struct task_struct *task);
 extern void wake_q_add_safe(struct wake_q_head *head, struct task_struct *task);
 extern void wake_up_q(struct wake_q_head *head);
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem.c
index 82cfc5a1c42d..087bbef2089e 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem.c
@@ -731,17 +731,22 @@ rwsem_down_write_slowpath(struct rw_semaphore *sem, int state)
 					? RWSEM_WAKE_READERS
 					: RWSEM_WAKE_ANY, &wake_q);
 
-		/*
-		 * The wakeup is normally called _after_ the wait_lock
-		 * is released, but given that we are proactively waking
-		 * readers we can deal with the wake_q overhead as it is
-		 * similar to releasing and taking the wait_lock again
-		 * for attempting rwsem_try_write_lock().
-		 */
-		wake_up_q(&wake_q);
-
-		/* We need wake_q again below, reinitialize */
-		wake_q_init(&wake_q);
+		if (!wake_q_empty(&wake_q)) {
+			/*
+			 * We want to minimize wait_lock hold time especially
+			 * when a large number of readers are to be woken up.
+			 */
+			raw_spin_unlock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
+			wake_up_q(&wake_q);
+			wake_q_init(&wake_q);	/* Used again, reinit */
+			raw_spin_lock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
+			/*
+			 * This waiter may have become first in the wait
+			 * list after re-acquring the wait_lock. The
+			 * rwsem_first_waiter() test in the main while
+			 * loop below will correctly detect that.
+			 */
+		}
 	} else {
 		count = atomic_long_add_return(RWSEM_FLAG_WAITERS, &sem->count);
 	}
-- 
2.18.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-04-18 23:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-18 23:46 [PATCH v5 00/18] locking/rwsem: Rwsem rearchitecture part 2 Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 01/18] locking/rwsem: Make owner available even if !CONFIG_RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 02/18] locking/rwsem: Remove rwsem_wake() wakeup optimization Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 03/18] locking/rwsem: Implement a new locking scheme Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 04/18] locking/rwsem: Merge rwsem.h and rwsem-xadd.c into rwsem.c Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 05/18] locking/rwsem: Code cleanup after files merging Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 06/18] locking/rwsem: Make rwsem_spin_on_owner() return owner state Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 07/18] locking/rwsem: Implement lock handoff to prevent lock starvation Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 09/18] locking/rwsem: More optimal RT task handling of null owner Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 10/18] locking/rwsem: Wake up almost all readers in wait queue Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 11/18] locking/rwsem: Clarify usage of owner's nonspinaable bit Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 12/18] locking/rwsem: Enable readers spinning on writer Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 13/18] locking/rwsem: Enable time-based spinning on reader-owned rwsem Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 14/18] locking/rwsem: Adaptive disabling of reader optimistic spinning Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 15/18] locking/rwsem: Add more rwsem owner access helpers Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 16/18] locking/rwsem: Guard against making count negative Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 17/18] locking/rwsem: Merge owner into count on x86-64 Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:46 ` [PATCH v5 18/18] locking/rwsem: Remove redundant computation of writer lock word Waiman Long
2019-04-18 23:56 ` [PATCH v5 00/18] locking/rwsem: Rwsem rearchitecture part 2 Waiman Long
2019-04-19  7:50   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-19 12:49     ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-19 15:00       ` Waiman Long
2019-04-19 16:56         ` 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=20190418234628.3675-9-longman@redhat.com \
    --to=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --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).