2019-06-03 08:44:50 +03:00
|
|
|
/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
|
2012-03-05 15:49:30 +04:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
|
* Copyright (C) 2012 ARM Ltd.
|
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
#ifndef __ASM_SPINLOCK_H
|
|
|
|
|
#define __ASM_SPINLOCK_H
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-03-13 23:45:45 +03:00
|
|
|
#include <asm/qspinlock.h>
|
2021-02-10 21:16:31 +03:00
|
|
|
#include <asm/qrwlock.h>
|
2012-03-05 15:49:30 +04:00
|
|
|
|
locking: Introduce smp_mb__after_spinlock()
Since its inception, our understanding of ACQUIRE, esp. as applied to
spinlocks, has changed somewhat. Also, I wonder if, with a simple
change, we cannot make it provide more.
The problem with the comment is that the STORE done by spin_lock isn't
itself ordered by the ACQUIRE, and therefore a later LOAD can pass over
it and cross with any prior STORE, rendering the default WMB
insufficient (pointed out by Alan).
Now, this is only really a problem on PowerPC and ARM64, both of
which already defined smp_mb__before_spinlock() as a smp_mb().
At the same time, we can get a much stronger construct if we place
that same barrier _inside_ the spin_lock(). In that case we upgrade
the RCpc spinlock to an RCsc. That would make all schedule() calls
fully transitive against one another.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2016-09-05 12:37:53 +03:00
|
|
|
/* See include/linux/spinlock.h */
|
|
|
|
|
#define smp_mb__after_spinlock() smp_mb()
|
2016-09-05 13:56:05 +03:00
|
|
|
|
locking/osq: Use optimized spinning loop for arm64
Arm64 has a more optimized spinning loop (atomic_cond_read_acquire)
using wfe for spinlock that can boost performance of sibling threads
by putting the current cpu to a wait state that is broken only when
the monitored variable changes or an external event happens.
OSQ has a more complicated spinning loop. Besides the lock value, it
also checks for need_resched() and vcpu_is_preempted(). The check for
need_resched() is not a problem as it is only set by the tick interrupt
handler. That will be detected by the spinning cpu right after iret.
The vcpu_is_preempted() check, however, is a problem as changes to the
preempt state of of previous node will not affect the wait state. For
ARM64, vcpu_is_preempted is not currently defined and so is a no-op.
Will has indicated that he is planning to para-virtualize wfe instead
of defining vcpu_is_preempted for PV support. So just add a comment in
arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h to indicate that vcpu_is_preempted()
should not be defined as suggested.
On a 2-socket 56-core 224-thread ARM64 system, a kernel mutex locking
microbenchmark was run for 10s with and without the patch. The
performance numbers before patch were:
Running locktest with mutex [runtime = 10s, load = 1]
Threads = 224, Min/Mean/Max = 316/123,143/2,121,269
Threads = 224, Total Rate = 2,757 kop/s; Percpu Rate = 12 kop/s
After patch, the numbers were:
Running locktest with mutex [runtime = 10s, load = 1]
Threads = 224, Min/Mean/Max = 334/147,836/1,304,787
Threads = 224, Total Rate = 3,311 kop/s; Percpu Rate = 15 kop/s
So there was about 20% performance improvement.
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200113150735.21956-1-longman@redhat.com
2020-01-13 18:07:35 +03:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
|
* Changing this will break osq_lock() thanks to the call inside
|
|
|
|
|
* smp_cond_load_relaxed().
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
* See:
|
|
|
|
|
* https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200110100612.GC2827@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
|
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2020-01-23 23:20:51 +03:00
|
|
|
#define vcpu_is_preempted vcpu_is_preempted
|
|
|
|
|
static inline bool vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
return false;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
locking/osq: Use optimized spinning loop for arm64
Arm64 has a more optimized spinning loop (atomic_cond_read_acquire)
using wfe for spinlock that can boost performance of sibling threads
by putting the current cpu to a wait state that is broken only when
the monitored variable changes or an external event happens.
OSQ has a more complicated spinning loop. Besides the lock value, it
also checks for need_resched() and vcpu_is_preempted(). The check for
need_resched() is not a problem as it is only set by the tick interrupt
handler. That will be detected by the spinning cpu right after iret.
The vcpu_is_preempted() check, however, is a problem as changes to the
preempt state of of previous node will not affect the wait state. For
ARM64, vcpu_is_preempted is not currently defined and so is a no-op.
Will has indicated that he is planning to para-virtualize wfe instead
of defining vcpu_is_preempted for PV support. So just add a comment in
arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h to indicate that vcpu_is_preempted()
should not be defined as suggested.
On a 2-socket 56-core 224-thread ARM64 system, a kernel mutex locking
microbenchmark was run for 10s with and without the patch. The
performance numbers before patch were:
Running locktest with mutex [runtime = 10s, load = 1]
Threads = 224, Min/Mean/Max = 316/123,143/2,121,269
Threads = 224, Total Rate = 2,757 kop/s; Percpu Rate = 12 kop/s
After patch, the numbers were:
Running locktest with mutex [runtime = 10s, load = 1]
Threads = 224, Min/Mean/Max = 334/147,836/1,304,787
Threads = 224, Total Rate = 3,311 kop/s; Percpu Rate = 15 kop/s
So there was about 20% performance improvement.
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200113150735.21956-1-longman@redhat.com
2020-01-13 18:07:35 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2012-03-05 15:49:30 +04:00
|
|
|
#endif /* __ASM_SPINLOCK_H */
|
