diff options
author | Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> | 2018-04-26 12:34:25 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> | 2018-04-27 09:48:52 +0200 |
commit | 9d4646d14d51d62b967a12452c30ea7edf8dd8fa (patch) | |
tree | 9867a52f6c68760063540e8344ebd340bd66eeba /kernel/locking | |
parent | locking/qspinlock: Use smp_store_release() in queued_spin_unlock() (diff) | |
download | linux-9d4646d14d51d62b967a12452c30ea7edf8dd8fa.tar.xz linux-9d4646d14d51d62b967a12452c30ea7edf8dd8fa.zip |
locking/qspinlock: Elide back-to-back RELEASE operations with smp_wmb()
The qspinlock slowpath must ensure that the MCS node is fully initialised
before it can be reached by another other CPU. This is currently enforced
by using a RELEASE operation when updating the tail and also when linking
the node into the waitqueue, since the control dependency off xchg_tail
is insufficient to enforce sufficient ordering, see:
95bcade33a8a ("locking/qspinlock: Ensure node is initialised before updating prev->next")
Back-to-back RELEASE operations may be expensive on some architectures,
particularly those that implement them using fences under the hood. We
can replace the two RELEASE operations with a single smp_wmb() fence and
use RELAXED operations for the subsequent publishing of the node.
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: boqun.feng@gmail.com
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1524738868-31318-12-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel/locking')
-rw-r--r-- | kernel/locking/qspinlock.c | 33 |
1 files changed, 17 insertions, 16 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c index d6c3b029bd93..956a12983bd0 100644 --- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c +++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c @@ -164,10 +164,10 @@ static __always_inline void clear_pending_set_locked(struct qspinlock *lock) static __always_inline u32 xchg_tail(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 tail) { /* - * Use release semantics to make sure that the MCS node is properly - * initialized before changing the tail code. + * We can use relaxed semantics since the caller ensures that the + * MCS node is properly initialized before updating the tail. */ - return (u32)xchg_release(&lock->tail, + return (u32)xchg_relaxed(&lock->tail, tail >> _Q_TAIL_OFFSET) << _Q_TAIL_OFFSET; } @@ -212,10 +212,11 @@ static __always_inline u32 xchg_tail(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 tail) for (;;) { new = (val & _Q_LOCKED_PENDING_MASK) | tail; /* - * Use release semantics to make sure that the MCS node is - * properly initialized before changing the tail code. + * We can use relaxed semantics since the caller ensures that + * the MCS node is properly initialized before updating the + * tail. */ - old = atomic_cmpxchg_release(&lock->val, val, new); + old = atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed(&lock->val, val, new); if (old == val) break; @@ -388,12 +389,18 @@ queue: goto release; /* + * Ensure that the initialisation of @node is complete before we + * publish the updated tail via xchg_tail() and potentially link + * @node into the waitqueue via WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, node) below. + */ + smp_wmb(); + + /* + * Publish the updated tail. * We have already touched the queueing cacheline; don't bother with * pending stuff. * * p,*,* -> n,*,* - * - * RELEASE, such that the stores to @node must be complete. */ old = xchg_tail(lock, tail); next = NULL; @@ -405,14 +412,8 @@ queue: if (old & _Q_TAIL_MASK) { prev = decode_tail(old); - /* - * We must ensure that the stores to @node are observed before - * the write to prev->next. The address dependency from - * xchg_tail is not sufficient to ensure this because the read - * component of xchg_tail is unordered with respect to the - * initialisation of @node. - */ - smp_store_release(&prev->next, node); + /* Link @node into the waitqueue. */ + WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, node); pv_wait_node(node, prev); arch_mcs_spin_lock_contended(&node->locked); |