1
0
Fork 0
alistair23-linux/arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h

306 lines
7.5 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

#ifndef _ASM_X86_SPINLOCK_H
#define _ASM_X86_SPINLOCK_H
#include <asm/atomic.h>
#include <asm/rwlock.h>
#include <asm/page.h>
#include <asm/processor.h>
x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks Introduce ticket lock spinlocks for x86 which are FIFO. The implementation is described in the comments. The straight-line lock/unlock instruction sequence is slightly slower than the dec based locks on modern x86 CPUs, however the difference is quite small on Core2 and Opteron when working out of cache, and becomes almost insignificant even on P4 when the lock misses cache. trylock is more significantly slower, but they are relatively rare. On an 8 core (2 socket) Opteron, spinlock unfairness is extremely noticable, with a userspace test having a difference of up to 2x runtime per thread, and some threads are starved or "unfairly" granted the lock up to 1 000 000 (!) times. After this patch, all threads appear to finish at exactly the same time. The memory ordering of the lock does conform to x86 standards, and the implementation has been reviewed by Intel and AMD engineers. The algorithm also tells us how many CPUs are contending the lock, so lockbreak becomes trivial and we no longer have to waste 4 bytes per spinlock for it. After this, we can no longer spin on any locks with preempt enabled and cannot reenable interrupts when spinning on an irq safe lock, because at that point we have already taken a ticket and the would deadlock if the same CPU tries to take the lock again. These are questionable anyway: if the lock happens to be called under a preempt or interrupt disabled section, then it will just have the same latency problems. The real fix is to keep critical sections short, and ensure locks are reasonably fair (which this patch does). Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-01-30 05:31:21 -07:00
#include <linux/compiler.h>
x86/paravirt: add hooks for spinlock operations Ticket spinlocks have absolutely ghastly worst-case performance characteristics in a virtual environment. If there is any contention for physical CPUs (ie, there are more runnable vcpus than cpus), then ticket locks can cause the system to end up spending 90+% of its time spinning. The problem is that (v)cpus waiting on a ticket spinlock will be granted access to the lock in strict order they got their tickets. If the hypervisor scheduler doesn't give the vcpus time in that order, they will burn timeslices waiting for the scheduler to give the right vcpu some time. In the worst case it could take O(n^2) vcpu scheduler timeslices for everyone waiting on the lock to get it, not counting new cpus trying to take the lock while the log-jam is sorted out. These hooks allow a paravirt backend to replace the spinlock implementation. At the very least, this could revert the implementation back to the old lock algorithm, which allows the next scheduled vcpu to take the lock, and has basically fairly good performance. It also allows the spinlocks to take advantages of the hypervisor features to make locks more efficient (spin and block, for example). The cost to native execution is an extra direct call when using a spinlock function. There's no overhead if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is turned off. The lock structure is fixed at a single "unsigned int", initialized to zero, but the spinlock implementation can use it as it wishes. Thanks to Thomas Friebel's Xen Summit talk "Preventing Guests from Spinning Around" for pointing out this problem. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz> Cc: Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org> Cc: Xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Cc: Thomas Friebel <thomas.friebel@amd.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-07-07 13:07:50 -06:00
#include <asm/paravirt.h>
/*
* Your basic SMP spinlocks, allowing only a single CPU anywhere
*
* Simple spin lock operations. There are two variants, one clears IRQ's
* on the local processor, one does not.
*
x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks Introduce ticket lock spinlocks for x86 which are FIFO. The implementation is described in the comments. The straight-line lock/unlock instruction sequence is slightly slower than the dec based locks on modern x86 CPUs, however the difference is quite small on Core2 and Opteron when working out of cache, and becomes almost insignificant even on P4 when the lock misses cache. trylock is more significantly slower, but they are relatively rare. On an 8 core (2 socket) Opteron, spinlock unfairness is extremely noticable, with a userspace test having a difference of up to 2x runtime per thread, and some threads are starved or "unfairly" granted the lock up to 1 000 000 (!) times. After this patch, all threads appear to finish at exactly the same time. The memory ordering of the lock does conform to x86 standards, and the implementation has been reviewed by Intel and AMD engineers. The algorithm also tells us how many CPUs are contending the lock, so lockbreak becomes trivial and we no longer have to waste 4 bytes per spinlock for it. After this, we can no longer spin on any locks with preempt enabled and cannot reenable interrupts when spinning on an irq safe lock, because at that point we have already taken a ticket and the would deadlock if the same CPU tries to take the lock again. These are questionable anyway: if the lock happens to be called under a preempt or interrupt disabled section, then it will just have the same latency problems. The real fix is to keep critical sections short, and ensure locks are reasonably fair (which this patch does). Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-01-30 05:31:21 -07:00
* These are fair FIFO ticket locks, which are currently limited to 256
* CPUs.
*
* (the type definitions are in asm/spinlock_types.h)
*/
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
# define LOCK_PTR_REG "a"
# define REG_PTR_MODE "k"
#else
# define LOCK_PTR_REG "D"
# define REG_PTR_MODE "q"
#endif
#if defined(CONFIG_X86_32) && \
(defined(CONFIG_X86_OOSTORE) || defined(CONFIG_X86_PPRO_FENCE))
/*
* On PPro SMP or if we are using OOSTORE, we use a locked operation to unlock
* (PPro errata 66, 92)
*/
# define UNLOCK_LOCK_PREFIX LOCK_PREFIX
#else
# define UNLOCK_LOCK_PREFIX
x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks Introduce ticket lock spinlocks for x86 which are FIFO. The implementation is described in the comments. The straight-line lock/unlock instruction sequence is slightly slower than the dec based locks on modern x86 CPUs, however the difference is quite small on Core2 and Opteron when working out of cache, and becomes almost insignificant even on P4 when the lock misses cache. trylock is more significantly slower, but they are relatively rare. On an 8 core (2 socket) Opteron, spinlock unfairness is extremely noticable, with a userspace test having a difference of up to 2x runtime per thread, and some threads are starved or "unfairly" granted the lock up to 1 000 000 (!) times. After this patch, all threads appear to finish at exactly the same time. The memory ordering of the lock does conform to x86 standards, and the implementation has been reviewed by Intel and AMD engineers. The algorithm also tells us how many CPUs are contending the lock, so lockbreak becomes trivial and we no longer have to waste 4 bytes per spinlock for it. After this, we can no longer spin on any locks with preempt enabled and cannot reenable interrupts when spinning on an irq safe lock, because at that point we have already taken a ticket and the would deadlock if the same CPU tries to take the lock again. These are questionable anyway: if the lock happens to be called under a preempt or interrupt disabled section, then it will just have the same latency problems. The real fix is to keep critical sections short, and ensure locks are reasonably fair (which this patch does). Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-01-30 05:31:21 -07:00
#endif
/*
* Ticket locks are conceptually two parts, one indicating the current head of
* the queue, and the other indicating the current tail. The lock is acquired
* by atomically noting the tail and incrementing it by one (thus adding
* ourself to the queue and noting our position), then waiting until the head
* becomes equal to the the initial value of the tail.
*
* We use an xadd covering *both* parts of the lock, to increment the tail and
* also load the position of the head, which takes care of memory ordering
* issues and should be optimal for the uncontended case. Note the tail must be
* in the high part, because a wide xadd increment of the low part would carry
* up and contaminate the high part.
*
* With fewer than 2^8 possible CPUs, we can use x86's partial registers to
* save some instructions and make the code more elegant. There really isn't
* much between them in performance though, especially as locks are out of line.
*/
#if (NR_CPUS < 256)
#define TICKET_SHIFT 8
x86/paravirt: add hooks for spinlock operations Ticket spinlocks have absolutely ghastly worst-case performance characteristics in a virtual environment. If there is any contention for physical CPUs (ie, there are more runnable vcpus than cpus), then ticket locks can cause the system to end up spending 90+% of its time spinning. The problem is that (v)cpus waiting on a ticket spinlock will be granted access to the lock in strict order they got their tickets. If the hypervisor scheduler doesn't give the vcpus time in that order, they will burn timeslices waiting for the scheduler to give the right vcpu some time. In the worst case it could take O(n^2) vcpu scheduler timeslices for everyone waiting on the lock to get it, not counting new cpus trying to take the lock while the log-jam is sorted out. These hooks allow a paravirt backend to replace the spinlock implementation. At the very least, this could revert the implementation back to the old lock algorithm, which allows the next scheduled vcpu to take the lock, and has basically fairly good performance. It also allows the spinlocks to take advantages of the hypervisor features to make locks more efficient (spin and block, for example). The cost to native execution is an extra direct call when using a spinlock function. There's no overhead if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is turned off. The lock structure is fixed at a single "unsigned int", initialized to zero, but the spinlock implementation can use it as it wishes. Thanks to Thomas Friebel's Xen Summit talk "Preventing Guests from Spinning Around" for pointing out this problem. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz> Cc: Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org> Cc: Xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Cc: Thomas Friebel <thomas.friebel@amd.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-07-07 13:07:50 -06:00
static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_lock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks Introduce ticket lock spinlocks for x86 which are FIFO. The implementation is described in the comments. The straight-line lock/unlock instruction sequence is slightly slower than the dec based locks on modern x86 CPUs, however the difference is quite small on Core2 and Opteron when working out of cache, and becomes almost insignificant even on P4 when the lock misses cache. trylock is more significantly slower, but they are relatively rare. On an 8 core (2 socket) Opteron, spinlock unfairness is extremely noticable, with a userspace test having a difference of up to 2x runtime per thread, and some threads are starved or "unfairly" granted the lock up to 1 000 000 (!) times. After this patch, all threads appear to finish at exactly the same time. The memory ordering of the lock does conform to x86 standards, and the implementation has been reviewed by Intel and AMD engineers. The algorithm also tells us how many CPUs are contending the lock, so lockbreak becomes trivial and we no longer have to waste 4 bytes per spinlock for it. After this, we can no longer spin on any locks with preempt enabled and cannot reenable interrupts when spinning on an irq safe lock, because at that point we have already taken a ticket and the would deadlock if the same CPU tries to take the lock again. These are questionable anyway: if the lock happens to be called under a preempt or interrupt disabled section, then it will just have the same latency problems. The real fix is to keep critical sections short, and ensure locks are reasonably fair (which this patch does). Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-01-30 05:31:21 -07:00
short inc = 0x0100;
asm volatile (
x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks Introduce ticket lock spinlocks for x86 which are FIFO. The implementation is described in the comments. The straight-line lock/unlock instruction sequence is slightly slower than the dec based locks on modern x86 CPUs, however the difference is quite small on Core2 and Opteron when working out of cache, and becomes almost insignificant even on P4 when the lock misses cache. trylock is more significantly slower, but they are relatively rare. On an 8 core (2 socket) Opteron, spinlock unfairness is extremely noticable, with a userspace test having a difference of up to 2x runtime per thread, and some threads are starved or "unfairly" granted the lock up to 1 000 000 (!) times. After this patch, all threads appear to finish at exactly the same time. The memory ordering of the lock does conform to x86 standards, and the implementation has been reviewed by Intel and AMD engineers. The algorithm also tells us how many CPUs are contending the lock, so lockbreak becomes trivial and we no longer have to waste 4 bytes per spinlock for it. After this, we can no longer spin on any locks with preempt enabled and cannot reenable interrupts when spinning on an irq safe lock, because at that point we have already taken a ticket and the would deadlock if the same CPU tries to take the lock again. These are questionable anyway: if the lock happens to be called under a preempt or interrupt disabled section, then it will just have the same latency problems. The real fix is to keep critical sections short, and ensure locks are reasonably fair (which this patch does). Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-01-30 05:31:21 -07:00
LOCK_PREFIX "xaddw %w0, %1\n"
"1:\t"
"cmpb %h0, %b0\n\t"
"je 2f\n\t"
"rep ; nop\n\t"
"movb %1, %b0\n\t"
/* don't need lfence here, because loads are in-order */
"jmp 1b\n"
x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks Introduce ticket lock spinlocks for x86 which are FIFO. The implementation is described in the comments. The straight-line lock/unlock instruction sequence is slightly slower than the dec based locks on modern x86 CPUs, however the difference is quite small on Core2 and Opteron when working out of cache, and becomes almost insignificant even on P4 when the lock misses cache. trylock is more significantly slower, but they are relatively rare. On an 8 core (2 socket) Opteron, spinlock unfairness is extremely noticable, with a userspace test having a difference of up to 2x runtime per thread, and some threads are starved or "unfairly" granted the lock up to 1 000 000 (!) times. After this patch, all threads appear to finish at exactly the same time. The memory ordering of the lock does conform to x86 standards, and the implementation has been reviewed by Intel and AMD engineers. The algorithm also tells us how many CPUs are contending the lock, so lockbreak becomes trivial and we no longer have to waste 4 bytes per spinlock for it. After this, we can no longer spin on any locks with preempt enabled and cannot reenable interrupts when spinning on an irq safe lock, because at that point we have already taken a ticket and the would deadlock if the same CPU tries to take the lock again. These are questionable anyway: if the lock happens to be called under a preempt or interrupt disabled section, then it will just have the same latency problems. The real fix is to keep critical sections short, and ensure locks are reasonably fair (which this patch does). Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-01-30 05:31:21 -07:00
"2:"
: "+Q" (inc), "+m" (lock->slock)
x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks Introduce ticket lock spinlocks for x86 which are FIFO. The implementation is described in the comments. The straight-line lock/unlock instruction sequence is slightly slower than the dec based locks on modern x86 CPUs, however the difference is quite small on Core2 and Opteron when working out of cache, and becomes almost insignificant even on P4 when the lock misses cache. trylock is more significantly slower, but they are relatively rare. On an 8 core (2 socket) Opteron, spinlock unfairness is extremely noticable, with a userspace test having a difference of up to 2x runtime per thread, and some threads are starved or "unfairly" granted the lock up to 1 000 000 (!) times. After this patch, all threads appear to finish at exactly the same time. The memory ordering of the lock does conform to x86 standards, and the implementation has been reviewed by Intel and AMD engineers. The algorithm also tells us how many CPUs are contending the lock, so lockbreak becomes trivial and we no longer have to waste 4 bytes per spinlock for it. After this, we can no longer spin on any locks with preempt enabled and cannot reenable interrupts when spinning on an irq safe lock, because at that point we have already taken a ticket and the would deadlock if the same CPU tries to take the lock again. These are questionable anyway: if the lock happens to be called under a preempt or interrupt disabled section, then it will just have the same latency problems. The real fix is to keep critical sections short, and ensure locks are reasonably fair (which this patch does). Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-01-30 05:31:21 -07:00
:
: "memory", "cc");
}
x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks Introduce ticket lock spinlocks for x86 which are FIFO. The implementation is described in the comments. The straight-line lock/unlock instruction sequence is slightly slower than the dec based locks on modern x86 CPUs, however the difference is quite small on Core2 and Opteron when working out of cache, and becomes almost insignificant even on P4 when the lock misses cache. trylock is more significantly slower, but they are relatively rare. On an 8 core (2 socket) Opteron, spinlock unfairness is extremely noticable, with a userspace test having a difference of up to 2x runtime per thread, and some threads are starved or "unfairly" granted the lock up to 1 000 000 (!) times. After this patch, all threads appear to finish at exactly the same time. The memory ordering of the lock does conform to x86 standards, and the implementation has been reviewed by Intel and AMD engineers. The algorithm also tells us how many CPUs are contending the lock, so lockbreak becomes trivial and we no longer have to waste 4 bytes per spinlock for it. After this, we can no longer spin on any locks with preempt enabled and cannot reenable interrupts when spinning on an irq safe lock, because at that point we have already taken a ticket and the would deadlock if the same CPU tries to take the lock again. These are questionable anyway: if the lock happens to be called under a preempt or interrupt disabled section, then it will just have the same latency problems. The real fix is to keep critical sections short, and ensure locks are reasonably fair (which this patch does). Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-01-30 05:31:21 -07:00
x86/paravirt: add hooks for spinlock operations Ticket spinlocks have absolutely ghastly worst-case performance characteristics in a virtual environment. If there is any contention for physical CPUs (ie, there are more runnable vcpus than cpus), then ticket locks can cause the system to end up spending 90+% of its time spinning. The problem is that (v)cpus waiting on a ticket spinlock will be granted access to the lock in strict order they got their tickets. If the hypervisor scheduler doesn't give the vcpus time in that order, they will burn timeslices waiting for the scheduler to give the right vcpu some time. In the worst case it could take O(n^2) vcpu scheduler timeslices for everyone waiting on the lock to get it, not counting new cpus trying to take the lock while the log-jam is sorted out. These hooks allow a paravirt backend to replace the spinlock implementation. At the very least, this could revert the implementation back to the old lock algorithm, which allows the next scheduled vcpu to take the lock, and has basically fairly good performance. It also allows the spinlocks to take advantages of the hypervisor features to make locks more efficient (spin and block, for example). The cost to native execution is an extra direct call when using a spinlock function. There's no overhead if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is turned off. The lock structure is fixed at a single "unsigned int", initialized to zero, but the spinlock implementation can use it as it wishes. Thanks to Thomas Friebel's Xen Summit talk "Preventing Guests from Spinning Around" for pointing out this problem. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz> Cc: Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org> Cc: Xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Cc: Thomas Friebel <thomas.friebel@amd.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-07-07 13:07:50 -06:00
static __always_inline int __ticket_spin_trylock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
int tmp, new;
asm volatile("movzwl %2, %0\n\t"
"cmpb %h0,%b0\n\t"
"leal 0x100(%" REG_PTR_MODE "0), %1\n\t"
"jne 1f\n\t"
x86: spinlock use LOCK_PREFIX Since we are now using DS prefixes instead of NOP to remove LOCK prefixes, there is no longer any problems with instruction boundaries moving around. * Linus Torvalds (torvalds@linux-foundation.org) wrote: > > > On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > > > > Changing the 0x90 (single-byte nop) currently used into a 0x3E DS segment > > override prefix should fix this issue. Since the default of the atomic > > instructions is to use the DS segment anyway, it should not affect the > > behavior. > > Ok, so I think this is an _excellent_ patch, but I'd like to also then use > LOCK_PREFIX in include/asm-x86/futex.h. > > See commit 9d55b9923a1b7ea8193b8875c57ec940dc2ff027. > > Linus Unless there a rationale for this, I think these be changed to LOCK_PREFIX too. grep "lock ;" include/asm-x86/spinlock.h "lock ; cmpxchgw %w1,%2\n\t" asm volatile("lock ; xaddl %0, %1\n" "lock ; cmpxchgl %1,%2\n\t" Applies to 2.6.27-rc2. Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca> Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> CC: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> CC: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> CC: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> CC: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com> CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> CC: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> CC: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> CC: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> CC: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com> CC: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com> CC: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@uudg.org> CC: Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> CC: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org> CC: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> CC: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
2008-08-15 10:56:59 -06:00
LOCK_PREFIX "cmpxchgw %w1,%2\n\t"
"1:"
"sete %b1\n\t"
"movzbl %b1,%0\n\t"
: "=&a" (tmp), "=&q" (new), "+m" (lock->slock)
:
: "memory", "cc");
x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks Introduce ticket lock spinlocks for x86 which are FIFO. The implementation is described in the comments. The straight-line lock/unlock instruction sequence is slightly slower than the dec based locks on modern x86 CPUs, however the difference is quite small on Core2 and Opteron when working out of cache, and becomes almost insignificant even on P4 when the lock misses cache. trylock is more significantly slower, but they are relatively rare. On an 8 core (2 socket) Opteron, spinlock unfairness is extremely noticable, with a userspace test having a difference of up to 2x runtime per thread, and some threads are starved or "unfairly" granted the lock up to 1 000 000 (!) times. After this patch, all threads appear to finish at exactly the same time. The memory ordering of the lock does conform to x86 standards, and the implementation has been reviewed by Intel and AMD engineers. The algorithm also tells us how many CPUs are contending the lock, so lockbreak becomes trivial and we no longer have to waste 4 bytes per spinlock for it. After this, we can no longer spin on any locks with preempt enabled and cannot reenable interrupts when spinning on an irq safe lock, because at that point we have already taken a ticket and the would deadlock if the same CPU tries to take the lock again. These are questionable anyway: if the lock happens to be called under a preempt or interrupt disabled section, then it will just have the same latency problems. The real fix is to keep critical sections short, and ensure locks are reasonably fair (which this patch does). Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-01-30 05:31:21 -07:00
return tmp;
}
x86/paravirt: add hooks for spinlock operations Ticket spinlocks have absolutely ghastly worst-case performance characteristics in a virtual environment. If there is any contention for physical CPUs (ie, there are more runnable vcpus than cpus), then ticket locks can cause the system to end up spending 90+% of its time spinning. The problem is that (v)cpus waiting on a ticket spinlock will be granted access to the lock in strict order they got their tickets. If the hypervisor scheduler doesn't give the vcpus time in that order, they will burn timeslices waiting for the scheduler to give the right vcpu some time. In the worst case it could take O(n^2) vcpu scheduler timeslices for everyone waiting on the lock to get it, not counting new cpus trying to take the lock while the log-jam is sorted out. These hooks allow a paravirt backend to replace the spinlock implementation. At the very least, this could revert the implementation back to the old lock algorithm, which allows the next scheduled vcpu to take the lock, and has basically fairly good performance. It also allows the spinlocks to take advantages of the hypervisor features to make locks more efficient (spin and block, for example). The cost to native execution is an extra direct call when using a spinlock function. There's no overhead if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is turned off. The lock structure is fixed at a single "unsigned int", initialized to zero, but the spinlock implementation can use it as it wishes. Thanks to Thomas Friebel's Xen Summit talk "Preventing Guests from Spinning Around" for pointing out this problem. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz> Cc: Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org> Cc: Xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Cc: Thomas Friebel <thomas.friebel@amd.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-07-07 13:07:50 -06:00
static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_unlock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
asm volatile(UNLOCK_LOCK_PREFIX "incb %0"
: "+m" (lock->slock)
:
: "memory", "cc");
}
#else
#define TICKET_SHIFT 16
x86/paravirt: add hooks for spinlock operations Ticket spinlocks have absolutely ghastly worst-case performance characteristics in a virtual environment. If there is any contention for physical CPUs (ie, there are more runnable vcpus than cpus), then ticket locks can cause the system to end up spending 90+% of its time spinning. The problem is that (v)cpus waiting on a ticket spinlock will be granted access to the lock in strict order they got their tickets. If the hypervisor scheduler doesn't give the vcpus time in that order, they will burn timeslices waiting for the scheduler to give the right vcpu some time. In the worst case it could take O(n^2) vcpu scheduler timeslices for everyone waiting on the lock to get it, not counting new cpus trying to take the lock while the log-jam is sorted out. These hooks allow a paravirt backend to replace the spinlock implementation. At the very least, this could revert the implementation back to the old lock algorithm, which allows the next scheduled vcpu to take the lock, and has basically fairly good performance. It also allows the spinlocks to take advantages of the hypervisor features to make locks more efficient (spin and block, for example). The cost to native execution is an extra direct call when using a spinlock function. There's no overhead if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is turned off. The lock structure is fixed at a single "unsigned int", initialized to zero, but the spinlock implementation can use it as it wishes. Thanks to Thomas Friebel's Xen Summit talk "Preventing Guests from Spinning Around" for pointing out this problem. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz> Cc: Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org> Cc: Xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Cc: Thomas Friebel <thomas.friebel@amd.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-07-07 13:07:50 -06:00
static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_lock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
int inc = 0x00010000;
int tmp;
x86: spinlock use LOCK_PREFIX Since we are now using DS prefixes instead of NOP to remove LOCK prefixes, there is no longer any problems with instruction boundaries moving around. * Linus Torvalds (torvalds@linux-foundation.org) wrote: > > > On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > > > > Changing the 0x90 (single-byte nop) currently used into a 0x3E DS segment > > override prefix should fix this issue. Since the default of the atomic > > instructions is to use the DS segment anyway, it should not affect the > > behavior. > > Ok, so I think this is an _excellent_ patch, but I'd like to also then use > LOCK_PREFIX in include/asm-x86/futex.h. > > See commit 9d55b9923a1b7ea8193b8875c57ec940dc2ff027. > > Linus Unless there a rationale for this, I think these be changed to LOCK_PREFIX too. grep "lock ;" include/asm-x86/spinlock.h "lock ; cmpxchgw %w1,%2\n\t" asm volatile("lock ; xaddl %0, %1\n" "lock ; cmpxchgl %1,%2\n\t" Applies to 2.6.27-rc2. Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca> Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> CC: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> CC: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> CC: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> CC: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com> CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> CC: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> CC: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> CC: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> CC: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com> CC: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com> CC: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@uudg.org> CC: Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> CC: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org> CC: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> CC: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
2008-08-15 10:56:59 -06:00
asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX "xaddl %0, %1\n"
"movzwl %w0, %2\n\t"
"shrl $16, %0\n\t"
"1:\t"
"cmpl %0, %2\n\t"
"je 2f\n\t"
"rep ; nop\n\t"
"movzwl %1, %2\n\t"
/* don't need lfence here, because loads are in-order */
"jmp 1b\n"
"2:"
: "+r" (inc), "+m" (lock->slock), "=&r" (tmp)
:
: "memory", "cc");
}
x86/paravirt: add hooks for spinlock operations Ticket spinlocks have absolutely ghastly worst-case performance characteristics in a virtual environment. If there is any contention for physical CPUs (ie, there are more runnable vcpus than cpus), then ticket locks can cause the system to end up spending 90+% of its time spinning. The problem is that (v)cpus waiting on a ticket spinlock will be granted access to the lock in strict order they got their tickets. If the hypervisor scheduler doesn't give the vcpus time in that order, they will burn timeslices waiting for the scheduler to give the right vcpu some time. In the worst case it could take O(n^2) vcpu scheduler timeslices for everyone waiting on the lock to get it, not counting new cpus trying to take the lock while the log-jam is sorted out. These hooks allow a paravirt backend to replace the spinlock implementation. At the very least, this could revert the implementation back to the old lock algorithm, which allows the next scheduled vcpu to take the lock, and has basically fairly good performance. It also allows the spinlocks to take advantages of the hypervisor features to make locks more efficient (spin and block, for example). The cost to native execution is an extra direct call when using a spinlock function. There's no overhead if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is turned off. The lock structure is fixed at a single "unsigned int", initialized to zero, but the spinlock implementation can use it as it wishes. Thanks to Thomas Friebel's Xen Summit talk "Preventing Guests from Spinning Around" for pointing out this problem. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz> Cc: Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org> Cc: Xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Cc: Thomas Friebel <thomas.friebel@amd.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-07-07 13:07:50 -06:00
static __always_inline int __ticket_spin_trylock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
int tmp;
int new;
asm volatile("movl %2,%0\n\t"
"movl %0,%1\n\t"
"roll $16, %0\n\t"
"cmpl %0,%1\n\t"
"leal 0x00010000(%" REG_PTR_MODE "0), %1\n\t"
"jne 1f\n\t"
x86: spinlock use LOCK_PREFIX Since we are now using DS prefixes instead of NOP to remove LOCK prefixes, there is no longer any problems with instruction boundaries moving around. * Linus Torvalds (torvalds@linux-foundation.org) wrote: > > > On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > > > > Changing the 0x90 (single-byte nop) currently used into a 0x3E DS segment > > override prefix should fix this issue. Since the default of the atomic > > instructions is to use the DS segment anyway, it should not affect the > > behavior. > > Ok, so I think this is an _excellent_ patch, but I'd like to also then use > LOCK_PREFIX in include/asm-x86/futex.h. > > See commit 9d55b9923a1b7ea8193b8875c57ec940dc2ff027. > > Linus Unless there a rationale for this, I think these be changed to LOCK_PREFIX too. grep "lock ;" include/asm-x86/spinlock.h "lock ; cmpxchgw %w1,%2\n\t" asm volatile("lock ; xaddl %0, %1\n" "lock ; cmpxchgl %1,%2\n\t" Applies to 2.6.27-rc2. Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca> Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> CC: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> CC: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> CC: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> CC: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com> CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> CC: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> CC: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> CC: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> CC: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com> CC: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com> CC: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@uudg.org> CC: Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com> CC: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org> CC: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> CC: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
2008-08-15 10:56:59 -06:00
LOCK_PREFIX "cmpxchgl %1,%2\n\t"
"1:"
"sete %b1\n\t"
"movzbl %b1,%0\n\t"
: "=&a" (tmp), "=&q" (new), "+m" (lock->slock)
:
: "memory", "cc");
return tmp;
}
x86/paravirt: add hooks for spinlock operations Ticket spinlocks have absolutely ghastly worst-case performance characteristics in a virtual environment. If there is any contention for physical CPUs (ie, there are more runnable vcpus than cpus), then ticket locks can cause the system to end up spending 90+% of its time spinning. The problem is that (v)cpus waiting on a ticket spinlock will be granted access to the lock in strict order they got their tickets. If the hypervisor scheduler doesn't give the vcpus time in that order, they will burn timeslices waiting for the scheduler to give the right vcpu some time. In the worst case it could take O(n^2) vcpu scheduler timeslices for everyone waiting on the lock to get it, not counting new cpus trying to take the lock while the log-jam is sorted out. These hooks allow a paravirt backend to replace the spinlock implementation. At the very least, this could revert the implementation back to the old lock algorithm, which allows the next scheduled vcpu to take the lock, and has basically fairly good performance. It also allows the spinlocks to take advantages of the hypervisor features to make locks more efficient (spin and block, for example). The cost to native execution is an extra direct call when using a spinlock function. There's no overhead if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is turned off. The lock structure is fixed at a single "unsigned int", initialized to zero, but the spinlock implementation can use it as it wishes. Thanks to Thomas Friebel's Xen Summit talk "Preventing Guests from Spinning Around" for pointing out this problem. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz> Cc: Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org> Cc: Xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Cc: Thomas Friebel <thomas.friebel@amd.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-07-07 13:07:50 -06:00
static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_unlock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
asm volatile(UNLOCK_LOCK_PREFIX "incw %0"
: "+m" (lock->slock)
:
: "memory", "cc");
}
#endif
static inline int __ticket_spin_is_locked(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
int tmp = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->slock);
return !!(((tmp >> TICKET_SHIFT) ^ tmp) & ((1 << TICKET_SHIFT) - 1));
}
static inline int __ticket_spin_is_contended(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
int tmp = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->slock);
return (((tmp >> TICKET_SHIFT) - tmp) & ((1 << TICKET_SHIFT) - 1)) > 1;
}
x86/paravirt: add hooks for spinlock operations Ticket spinlocks have absolutely ghastly worst-case performance characteristics in a virtual environment. If there is any contention for physical CPUs (ie, there are more runnable vcpus than cpus), then ticket locks can cause the system to end up spending 90+% of its time spinning. The problem is that (v)cpus waiting on a ticket spinlock will be granted access to the lock in strict order they got their tickets. If the hypervisor scheduler doesn't give the vcpus time in that order, they will burn timeslices waiting for the scheduler to give the right vcpu some time. In the worst case it could take O(n^2) vcpu scheduler timeslices for everyone waiting on the lock to get it, not counting new cpus trying to take the lock while the log-jam is sorted out. These hooks allow a paravirt backend to replace the spinlock implementation. At the very least, this could revert the implementation back to the old lock algorithm, which allows the next scheduled vcpu to take the lock, and has basically fairly good performance. It also allows the spinlocks to take advantages of the hypervisor features to make locks more efficient (spin and block, for example). The cost to native execution is an extra direct call when using a spinlock function. There's no overhead if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is turned off. The lock structure is fixed at a single "unsigned int", initialized to zero, but the spinlock implementation can use it as it wishes. Thanks to Thomas Friebel's Xen Summit talk "Preventing Guests from Spinning Around" for pointing out this problem. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz> Cc: Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org> Cc: Xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Cc: Thomas Friebel <thomas.friebel@amd.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-07-07 13:07:50 -06:00
x86: Fix performance regression caused by paravirt_ops on native kernels Xiaohui Xin and some other folks at Intel have been looking into what's behind the performance hit of paravirt_ops when running native. It appears that the hit is entirely due to the paravirtualized spinlocks introduced by: | commit 8efcbab674de2bee45a2e4cdf97de16b8e609ac8 | Date: Mon Jul 7 12:07:51 2008 -0700 | | paravirt: introduce a "lock-byte" spinlock implementation The extra call/return in the spinlock path is somehow causing an increase in the cycles/instruction of somewhere around 2-7% (seems to vary quite a lot from test to test). The working theory is that the CPU's pipeline is getting upset about the call->call->locked-op->return->return, and seems to be failing to speculate (though I haven't seen anything definitive about the precise reasons). This doesn't entirely make sense, because the performance hit is also visible on unlock and other operations which don't involve locked instructions. But spinlock operations clearly swamp all the other pvops operations, even though I can't imagine that they're nearly as common (there's only a .05% increase in instructions executed). If I disable just the pv-spinlock calls, my tests show that pvops is identical to non-pvops performance on native (my measurements show that it is actually about .1% faster, but Xiaohui shows a .05% slowdown). Summary of results, averaging 10 runs of the "mmperf" test, using a no-pvops build as baseline: nopv Pv-nospin Pv-spin CPU cycles 100.00% 99.89% 102.18% instructions 100.00% 100.10% 100.15% CPI 100.00% 99.79% 102.03% cache ref 100.00% 100.84% 100.28% cache miss 100.00% 90.47% 88.56% cache miss rate 100.00% 89.72% 88.31% branches 100.00% 99.93% 100.04% branch miss 100.00% 103.66% 107.72% branch miss rt 100.00% 103.73% 107.67% wallclock 100.00% 99.90% 102.20% The clear effect here is that the 2% increase in CPI is directly reflected in the final wallclock time. (The other interesting effect is that the more ops are out of line calls via pvops, the lower the cache access and miss rates. Not too surprising, but it suggests that the non-pvops kernel is over-inlined. On the flipside, the branch misses go up correspondingly...) So, what's the fix? Paravirt patching turns all the pvops calls into direct calls, so _spin_lock etc do end up having direct calls. For example, the compiler generated code for paravirtualized _spin_lock is: <_spin_lock+0>: mov %gs:0xb4c8,%rax <_spin_lock+9>: incl 0xffffffffffffe044(%rax) <_spin_lock+15>: callq *0xffffffff805a5b30 <_spin_lock+22>: retq The indirect call will get patched to: <_spin_lock+0>: mov %gs:0xb4c8,%rax <_spin_lock+9>: incl 0xffffffffffffe044(%rax) <_spin_lock+15>: callq <__ticket_spin_lock> <_spin_lock+20>: nop; nop /* or whatever 2-byte nop */ <_spin_lock+22>: retq One possibility is to inline _spin_lock, etc, when building an optimised kernel (ie, when there's no spinlock/preempt instrumentation/debugging enabled). That will remove the outer call/return pair, returning the instruction stream to a single call/return, which will presumably execute the same as the non-pvops case. The downsides arel 1) it will replicate the preempt_disable/enable code at eack lock/unlock callsite; this code is fairly small, but not nothing; and 2) the spinlock definitions are already a very heavily tangled mass of #ifdefs and other preprocessor magic, and making any changes will be non-trivial. The other obvious answer is to disable pv-spinlocks. Making them a separate config option is fairly easy, and it would be trivial to enable them only when Xen is enabled (as the only non-default user). But it doesn't really address the common case of a distro build which is going to have Xen support enabled, and leaves the open question of whether the native performance cost of pv-spinlocks is worth the performance improvement on a loaded Xen system (10% saving of overall system CPU when guests block rather than spin). Still it is a reasonable short-term workaround. [ Impact: fix pvops performance regression when running native ] Analysed-by: "Xin Xiaohui" <xiaohui.xin@intel.com> Analysed-by: "Li Xin" <xin.li@intel.com> Analysed-by: "Nakajima Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Cc: Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> LKML-Reference: <4A0B62F7.5030802@goop.org> [ fixed the help text ] Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2009-05-13 18:16:55 -06:00
#ifndef CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS
x86/paravirt: add hooks for spinlock operations Ticket spinlocks have absolutely ghastly worst-case performance characteristics in a virtual environment. If there is any contention for physical CPUs (ie, there are more runnable vcpus than cpus), then ticket locks can cause the system to end up spending 90+% of its time spinning. The problem is that (v)cpus waiting on a ticket spinlock will be granted access to the lock in strict order they got their tickets. If the hypervisor scheduler doesn't give the vcpus time in that order, they will burn timeslices waiting for the scheduler to give the right vcpu some time. In the worst case it could take O(n^2) vcpu scheduler timeslices for everyone waiting on the lock to get it, not counting new cpus trying to take the lock while the log-jam is sorted out. These hooks allow a paravirt backend to replace the spinlock implementation. At the very least, this could revert the implementation back to the old lock algorithm, which allows the next scheduled vcpu to take the lock, and has basically fairly good performance. It also allows the spinlocks to take advantages of the hypervisor features to make locks more efficient (spin and block, for example). The cost to native execution is an extra direct call when using a spinlock function. There's no overhead if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is turned off. The lock structure is fixed at a single "unsigned int", initialized to zero, but the spinlock implementation can use it as it wishes. Thanks to Thomas Friebel's Xen Summit talk "Preventing Guests from Spinning Around" for pointing out this problem. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz> Cc: Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org> Cc: Xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Cc: Thomas Friebel <thomas.friebel@amd.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-07-07 13:07:50 -06:00
static inline int __raw_spin_is_locked(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
return __ticket_spin_is_locked(lock);
}
static inline int __raw_spin_is_contended(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
return __ticket_spin_is_contended(lock);
}
#define __raw_spin_is_contended __raw_spin_is_contended
x86/paravirt: add hooks for spinlock operations Ticket spinlocks have absolutely ghastly worst-case performance characteristics in a virtual environment. If there is any contention for physical CPUs (ie, there are more runnable vcpus than cpus), then ticket locks can cause the system to end up spending 90+% of its time spinning. The problem is that (v)cpus waiting on a ticket spinlock will be granted access to the lock in strict order they got their tickets. If the hypervisor scheduler doesn't give the vcpus time in that order, they will burn timeslices waiting for the scheduler to give the right vcpu some time. In the worst case it could take O(n^2) vcpu scheduler timeslices for everyone waiting on the lock to get it, not counting new cpus trying to take the lock while the log-jam is sorted out. These hooks allow a paravirt backend to replace the spinlock implementation. At the very least, this could revert the implementation back to the old lock algorithm, which allows the next scheduled vcpu to take the lock, and has basically fairly good performance. It also allows the spinlocks to take advantages of the hypervisor features to make locks more efficient (spin and block, for example). The cost to native execution is an extra direct call when using a spinlock function. There's no overhead if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is turned off. The lock structure is fixed at a single "unsigned int", initialized to zero, but the spinlock implementation can use it as it wishes. Thanks to Thomas Friebel's Xen Summit talk "Preventing Guests from Spinning Around" for pointing out this problem. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz> Cc: Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org> Cc: Xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Cc: Thomas Friebel <thomas.friebel@amd.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-07-07 13:07:50 -06:00
static __always_inline void __raw_spin_lock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
__ticket_spin_lock(lock);
}
static __always_inline int __raw_spin_trylock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
return __ticket_spin_trylock(lock);
}
static __always_inline void __raw_spin_unlock(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
__ticket_spin_unlock(lock);
}
static __always_inline void __raw_spin_lock_flags(raw_spinlock_t *lock,
unsigned long flags)
{
__raw_spin_lock(lock);
}
x86: Fix performance regression caused by paravirt_ops on native kernels Xiaohui Xin and some other folks at Intel have been looking into what's behind the performance hit of paravirt_ops when running native. It appears that the hit is entirely due to the paravirtualized spinlocks introduced by: | commit 8efcbab674de2bee45a2e4cdf97de16b8e609ac8 | Date: Mon Jul 7 12:07:51 2008 -0700 | | paravirt: introduce a "lock-byte" spinlock implementation The extra call/return in the spinlock path is somehow causing an increase in the cycles/instruction of somewhere around 2-7% (seems to vary quite a lot from test to test). The working theory is that the CPU's pipeline is getting upset about the call->call->locked-op->return->return, and seems to be failing to speculate (though I haven't seen anything definitive about the precise reasons). This doesn't entirely make sense, because the performance hit is also visible on unlock and other operations which don't involve locked instructions. But spinlock operations clearly swamp all the other pvops operations, even though I can't imagine that they're nearly as common (there's only a .05% increase in instructions executed). If I disable just the pv-spinlock calls, my tests show that pvops is identical to non-pvops performance on native (my measurements show that it is actually about .1% faster, but Xiaohui shows a .05% slowdown). Summary of results, averaging 10 runs of the "mmperf" test, using a no-pvops build as baseline: nopv Pv-nospin Pv-spin CPU cycles 100.00% 99.89% 102.18% instructions 100.00% 100.10% 100.15% CPI 100.00% 99.79% 102.03% cache ref 100.00% 100.84% 100.28% cache miss 100.00% 90.47% 88.56% cache miss rate 100.00% 89.72% 88.31% branches 100.00% 99.93% 100.04% branch miss 100.00% 103.66% 107.72% branch miss rt 100.00% 103.73% 107.67% wallclock 100.00% 99.90% 102.20% The clear effect here is that the 2% increase in CPI is directly reflected in the final wallclock time. (The other interesting effect is that the more ops are out of line calls via pvops, the lower the cache access and miss rates. Not too surprising, but it suggests that the non-pvops kernel is over-inlined. On the flipside, the branch misses go up correspondingly...) So, what's the fix? Paravirt patching turns all the pvops calls into direct calls, so _spin_lock etc do end up having direct calls. For example, the compiler generated code for paravirtualized _spin_lock is: <_spin_lock+0>: mov %gs:0xb4c8,%rax <_spin_lock+9>: incl 0xffffffffffffe044(%rax) <_spin_lock+15>: callq *0xffffffff805a5b30 <_spin_lock+22>: retq The indirect call will get patched to: <_spin_lock+0>: mov %gs:0xb4c8,%rax <_spin_lock+9>: incl 0xffffffffffffe044(%rax) <_spin_lock+15>: callq <__ticket_spin_lock> <_spin_lock+20>: nop; nop /* or whatever 2-byte nop */ <_spin_lock+22>: retq One possibility is to inline _spin_lock, etc, when building an optimised kernel (ie, when there's no spinlock/preempt instrumentation/debugging enabled). That will remove the outer call/return pair, returning the instruction stream to a single call/return, which will presumably execute the same as the non-pvops case. The downsides arel 1) it will replicate the preempt_disable/enable code at eack lock/unlock callsite; this code is fairly small, but not nothing; and 2) the spinlock definitions are already a very heavily tangled mass of #ifdefs and other preprocessor magic, and making any changes will be non-trivial. The other obvious answer is to disable pv-spinlocks. Making them a separate config option is fairly easy, and it would be trivial to enable them only when Xen is enabled (as the only non-default user). But it doesn't really address the common case of a distro build which is going to have Xen support enabled, and leaves the open question of whether the native performance cost of pv-spinlocks is worth the performance improvement on a loaded Xen system (10% saving of overall system CPU when guests block rather than spin). Still it is a reasonable short-term workaround. [ Impact: fix pvops performance regression when running native ] Analysed-by: "Xin Xiaohui" <xiaohui.xin@intel.com> Analysed-by: "Li Xin" <xin.li@intel.com> Analysed-by: "Nakajima Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Cc: Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> LKML-Reference: <4A0B62F7.5030802@goop.org> [ fixed the help text ] Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2009-05-13 18:16:55 -06:00
#endif /* CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS */
x86/paravirt: add hooks for spinlock operations Ticket spinlocks have absolutely ghastly worst-case performance characteristics in a virtual environment. If there is any contention for physical CPUs (ie, there are more runnable vcpus than cpus), then ticket locks can cause the system to end up spending 90+% of its time spinning. The problem is that (v)cpus waiting on a ticket spinlock will be granted access to the lock in strict order they got their tickets. If the hypervisor scheduler doesn't give the vcpus time in that order, they will burn timeslices waiting for the scheduler to give the right vcpu some time. In the worst case it could take O(n^2) vcpu scheduler timeslices for everyone waiting on the lock to get it, not counting new cpus trying to take the lock while the log-jam is sorted out. These hooks allow a paravirt backend to replace the spinlock implementation. At the very least, this could revert the implementation back to the old lock algorithm, which allows the next scheduled vcpu to take the lock, and has basically fairly good performance. It also allows the spinlocks to take advantages of the hypervisor features to make locks more efficient (spin and block, for example). The cost to native execution is an extra direct call when using a spinlock function. There's no overhead if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is turned off. The lock structure is fixed at a single "unsigned int", initialized to zero, but the spinlock implementation can use it as it wishes. Thanks to Thomas Friebel's Xen Summit talk "Preventing Guests from Spinning Around" for pointing out this problem. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz> Cc: Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org> Cc: Xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Cc: Thomas Friebel <thomas.friebel@amd.com> Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-07-07 13:07:50 -06:00
static inline void __raw_spin_unlock_wait(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
while (__raw_spin_is_locked(lock))
cpu_relax();
}
/*
* Read-write spinlocks, allowing multiple readers
* but only one writer.
*
* NOTE! it is quite common to have readers in interrupts
* but no interrupt writers. For those circumstances we
* can "mix" irq-safe locks - any writer needs to get a
* irq-safe write-lock, but readers can get non-irqsafe
* read-locks.
*
* On x86, we implement read-write locks as a 32-bit counter
* with the high bit (sign) being the "contended" bit.
*/
x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks Introduce ticket lock spinlocks for x86 which are FIFO. The implementation is described in the comments. The straight-line lock/unlock instruction sequence is slightly slower than the dec based locks on modern x86 CPUs, however the difference is quite small on Core2 and Opteron when working out of cache, and becomes almost insignificant even on P4 when the lock misses cache. trylock is more significantly slower, but they are relatively rare. On an 8 core (2 socket) Opteron, spinlock unfairness is extremely noticable, with a userspace test having a difference of up to 2x runtime per thread, and some threads are starved or "unfairly" granted the lock up to 1 000 000 (!) times. After this patch, all threads appear to finish at exactly the same time. The memory ordering of the lock does conform to x86 standards, and the implementation has been reviewed by Intel and AMD engineers. The algorithm also tells us how many CPUs are contending the lock, so lockbreak becomes trivial and we no longer have to waste 4 bytes per spinlock for it. After this, we can no longer spin on any locks with preempt enabled and cannot reenable interrupts when spinning on an irq safe lock, because at that point we have already taken a ticket and the would deadlock if the same CPU tries to take the lock again. These are questionable anyway: if the lock happens to be called under a preempt or interrupt disabled section, then it will just have the same latency problems. The real fix is to keep critical sections short, and ensure locks are reasonably fair (which this patch does). Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-01-30 05:31:21 -07:00
/**
* read_can_lock - would read_trylock() succeed?
* @lock: the rwlock in question.
*/
static inline int __raw_read_can_lock(raw_rwlock_t *lock)
{
return (int)(lock)->lock > 0;
}
x86: FIFO ticket spinlocks Introduce ticket lock spinlocks for x86 which are FIFO. The implementation is described in the comments. The straight-line lock/unlock instruction sequence is slightly slower than the dec based locks on modern x86 CPUs, however the difference is quite small on Core2 and Opteron when working out of cache, and becomes almost insignificant even on P4 when the lock misses cache. trylock is more significantly slower, but they are relatively rare. On an 8 core (2 socket) Opteron, spinlock unfairness is extremely noticable, with a userspace test having a difference of up to 2x runtime per thread, and some threads are starved or "unfairly" granted the lock up to 1 000 000 (!) times. After this patch, all threads appear to finish at exactly the same time. The memory ordering of the lock does conform to x86 standards, and the implementation has been reviewed by Intel and AMD engineers. The algorithm also tells us how many CPUs are contending the lock, so lockbreak becomes trivial and we no longer have to waste 4 bytes per spinlock for it. After this, we can no longer spin on any locks with preempt enabled and cannot reenable interrupts when spinning on an irq safe lock, because at that point we have already taken a ticket and the would deadlock if the same CPU tries to take the lock again. These are questionable anyway: if the lock happens to be called under a preempt or interrupt disabled section, then it will just have the same latency problems. The real fix is to keep critical sections short, and ensure locks are reasonably fair (which this patch does). Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
2008-01-30 05:31:21 -07:00
/**
* write_can_lock - would write_trylock() succeed?
* @lock: the rwlock in question.
*/
static inline int __raw_write_can_lock(raw_rwlock_t *lock)
{
return (lock)->lock == RW_LOCK_BIAS;
}
static inline void __raw_read_lock(raw_rwlock_t *rw)
{
asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX " subl $1,(%0)\n\t"
"jns 1f\n"
"call __read_lock_failed\n\t"
"1:\n"
::LOCK_PTR_REG (rw) : "memory");
}
static inline void __raw_write_lock(raw_rwlock_t *rw)
{
asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX " subl %1,(%0)\n\t"
"jz 1f\n"
"call __write_lock_failed\n\t"
"1:\n"
::LOCK_PTR_REG (rw), "i" (RW_LOCK_BIAS) : "memory");
}
static inline int __raw_read_trylock(raw_rwlock_t *lock)
{
atomic_t *count = (atomic_t *)lock;
if (atomic_dec_return(count) >= 0)
return 1;
atomic_inc(count);
return 0;
}
static inline int __raw_write_trylock(raw_rwlock_t *lock)
{
atomic_t *count = (atomic_t *)lock;
if (atomic_sub_and_test(RW_LOCK_BIAS, count))
return 1;
atomic_add(RW_LOCK_BIAS, count);
return 0;
}
static inline void __raw_read_unlock(raw_rwlock_t *rw)
{
asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX "incl %0" :"+m" (rw->lock) : : "memory");
}
static inline void __raw_write_unlock(raw_rwlock_t *rw)
{
asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX "addl %1, %0"
: "+m" (rw->lock) : "i" (RW_LOCK_BIAS) : "memory");
}
#define __raw_read_lock_flags(lock, flags) __raw_read_lock(lock)
#define __raw_write_lock_flags(lock, flags) __raw_write_lock(lock)
#define _raw_spin_relax(lock) cpu_relax()
#define _raw_read_relax(lock) cpu_relax()
#define _raw_write_relax(lock) cpu_relax()
#endif /* _ASM_X86_SPINLOCK_H */