Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1236722 > unrolled thread

[PATCH -tip v3 0/5] locking: Use acquire/release semantics

Started byDavidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
First post2015-09-30 22:10 +0200
Last post2015-09-30 22:40 +0200
Articles 8 — 4 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel


Contents

  [PATCH -tip v3 0/5] locking: Use acquire/release semantics Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2015-09-30 22:10 +0200
    [PATCH 5/5] locking/rwsem: Use acquire/release semantics Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2015-09-30 22:10 +0200
    [PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for inc/dec atomics Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2015-09-30 22:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}()  variants for inc/dec atomics Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-10-01 08:40 +0200
        Re: [PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}()  variants for inc/dec atomics Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> - 2015-10-05 19:40 +0200
          Re: [PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}()  variants for inc/dec atomics Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-10-05 21:50 +0200
    [PATCH 3/5] locking/rtmutex: Use acquire/release semantics Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2015-09-30 22:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH -tip v3 0/5] locking: Use acquire/release semantics Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2015-09-30 22:40 +0200

#1236722 — [PATCH -tip v3 0/5] locking: Use acquire/release semantics

FromDavidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Date2015-09-30 22:10 +0200
Subject[PATCH -tip v3 0/5] locking: Use acquire/release semantics
Message-ID<qevRo-6TJ-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
Changes from v2:
 o Redid changelog for patches 2-5 (tglx)

Changes from v1:
 o Fix bogus acquire in generic rwsem lock downgrade (Linus)
 o Fix bogus acquire in unlock_rt_mutex_safe() (tglx)

Hi,

This series continues porting users to Will's new _{acquire|release|relaxed}
optimizations for weakly ordered archs -- and in practice, arm64 being the only
actual user we have, thus could use a _lot_ more testing. While we have osq in
-tip recently, along with Waiman's one for native qspinlocks, the following
patches pretty much complete the move over for all things kernel/locking/*.
Of course, particular primitives can be found in the obvious patch titles. Note
that patch 1 adds the necessary machinery to fully support some locks, such as
rwsems.

Compiles on x86 and x86-64.

Thanks!

Davidlohr Bueso (5):
  asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for inc/dec
    atomics
  locking/mutex: Use acquire/release semantics
  locking/rtmutex: Use acquire/release semantics
  locking/mcs: Use acquire/release semantics
  locking/rwsem: Use acquire/release semantics

 include/asm-generic/atomic-long.h | 29 +++++++-----
 include/asm-generic/mutex-dec.h   |  8 ++--
 include/asm-generic/mutex-xchg.h  | 10 ++--
 include/asm-generic/rwsem.h       | 21 ++++++---
 include/linux/atomic.h            | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h     |  4 +-
 kernel/locking/mutex.c            |  9 ++--
 kernel/locking/rtmutex.c          | 30 ++++++++----
 kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c       |  5 +-
 9 files changed, 168 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)

--
2.1.4

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1236724 — [PATCH 5/5] locking/rwsem: Use acquire/release semantics

FromDavidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Date2015-09-30 22:10 +0200
Subject[PATCH 5/5] locking/rwsem: Use acquire/release semantics
Message-ID<qevRo-6TJ-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1236722
As of 654672d4ba1 (locking/atomics: Add _{acquire|release|relaxed}()
variants of some atomic operations) and 6d79ef2d30e (locking, asm-generic:
Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for 'atomic_long_t'), weakly
ordered archs can benefit from more relaxed use of barriers when locking
and unlocking, instead of regular full barrier semantics. While currently
only arm64 supports such optimizations, updating corresponding locking
primitives serves for other archs to immediately benefit as well, once the
necessary machinery is implemented of course.

Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
---
 include/asm-generic/rwsem.h | 21 ++++++++++++++-------
 kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c |  5 +++--
 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/asm-generic/rwsem.h b/include/asm-generic/rwsem.h
index d48bf5a..d6d5dc9 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/rwsem.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/rwsem.h
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
  */
 static inline void __down_read(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 {
-	if (unlikely(atomic_long_inc_return((atomic_long_t *)&sem->count) <= 0))
+	if (unlikely(atomic_long_inc_return_acquire((atomic_long_t *)&sem->count) <= 0))
 		rwsem_down_read_failed(sem);
 }
 
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ static inline int __down_read_trylock(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 	long tmp;
 
 	while ((tmp = sem->count) >= 0) {
-		if (tmp == cmpxchg(&sem->count, tmp,
+		if (tmp == cmpxchg_acquire(&sem->count, tmp,
 				   tmp + RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS)) {
 			return 1;
 		}
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ static inline void __down_write_nested(struct rw_semaphore *sem, int subclass)
 {
 	long tmp;
 
-	tmp = atomic_long_add_return(RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS,
+	tmp = atomic_long_add_return_acquire(RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS,
 				     (atomic_long_t *)&sem->count);
 	if (unlikely(tmp != RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS))
 		rwsem_down_write_failed(sem);
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static inline int __down_write_trylock(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 {
 	long tmp;
 
-	tmp = cmpxchg(&sem->count, RWSEM_UNLOCKED_VALUE,
+	tmp = cmpxchg_acquire(&sem->count, RWSEM_UNLOCKED_VALUE,
 		      RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS);
 	return tmp == RWSEM_UNLOCKED_VALUE;
 }
@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ static inline void __up_read(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 {
 	long tmp;
 
-	tmp = atomic_long_dec_return((atomic_long_t *)&sem->count);
+	tmp = atomic_long_dec_return_release((atomic_long_t *)&sem->count);
 	if (unlikely(tmp < -1 && (tmp & RWSEM_ACTIVE_MASK) == 0))
 		rwsem_wake(sem);
 }
@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static inline void __up_read(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
  */
 static inline void __up_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 {
-	if (unlikely(atomic_long_sub_return(RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS,
+	if (unlikely(atomic_long_sub_return_release(RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS,
 				 (atomic_long_t *)&sem->count) < 0))
 		rwsem_wake(sem);
 }
@@ -114,7 +114,14 @@ static inline void __downgrade_write(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 {
 	long tmp;
 
-	tmp = atomic_long_add_return(-RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS,
+	/*
+	 * When downgrading from exclusive to shared ownership,
+	 * anything inside the write-locked region cannot leak
+	 * into the read side. In contrast, anything in the
+	 * read-locked region is ok to be re-ordered into the
+	 * write side. As such, rely on RELEASE semantics.
+	 */
+	tmp = atomic_long_add_return_release(-RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS,
 				     (atomic_long_t *)&sem->count);
 	if (tmp < 0)
 		rwsem_downgrade_wake(sem);
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
index 0f18971..a4d4de0 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
@@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ static inline bool rwsem_try_write_lock(long count, struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 	 * to reduce unnecessary expensive cmpxchg() operations.
 	 */
 	if (count == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS &&
-	    cmpxchg(&sem->count, RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS,
+	    cmpxchg_acquire(&sem->count, RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS,
 		    RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS) == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS) {
 		if (!list_is_singular(&sem->wait_list))
 			rwsem_atomic_update(RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS, sem);
@@ -285,7 +285,8 @@ static inline bool rwsem_try_write_lock_unqueued(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 		if (!(count == 0 || count == RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS))
 			return false;
 
-		old = cmpxchg(&sem->count, count, count + RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS);
+		old = cmpxchg_acquire(&sem->count, count,
+				      count + RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS);
 		if (old == count) {
 			rwsem_set_owner(sem);
 			return true;
-- 
2.1.4

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1236725 — [PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for inc/dec atomics

FromDavidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Date2015-09-30 22:10 +0200
Subject[PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for inc/dec atomics
Message-ID<qevRo-6TJ-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1236722
Similar to what we have for regular add/sub calls. For now, no actual arch
implements them, so everyone falls back to the default atomics... iow,
nothing changes. These will be used in future primitives.

Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
---
 include/asm-generic/atomic-long.h | 29 +++++++-----
 include/linux/atomic.h            | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 114 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/asm-generic/atomic-long.h b/include/asm-generic/atomic-long.h
index 8942cdc..f91093c 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/atomic-long.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/atomic-long.h
@@ -159,19 +159,24 @@ static inline int atomic_long_add_negative(long i, atomic_long_t *l)
 	return ATOMIC_LONG_PFX(_add_negative)(i, v);
 }
 
-static inline long atomic_long_inc_return(atomic_long_t *l)
-{
-	ATOMIC_LONG_PFX(_t) *v = (ATOMIC_LONG_PFX(_t) *)l;
-
-	return (long)ATOMIC_LONG_PFX(_inc_return)(v);
-}
-
-static inline long atomic_long_dec_return(atomic_long_t *l)
-{
-	ATOMIC_LONG_PFX(_t) *v = (ATOMIC_LONG_PFX(_t) *)l;
-
-	return (long)ATOMIC_LONG_PFX(_dec_return)(v);
+#define ATOMIC_LONG_INC_DEC_OP(op, mo)					\
+static inline long							\
+atomic_long_##op##_return##mo(atomic_long_t *l)				\
+{									\
+	ATOMIC_LONG_PFX(_t) *v = (ATOMIC_LONG_PFX(_t) *)l;		\
+									\
+	return (long)ATOMIC_LONG_PFX(_##op##_return##mo)(v);		\
 }
+ATOMIC_LONG_INC_DEC_OP(inc,)
+ATOMIC_LONG_INC_DEC_OP(inc, _relaxed)
+ATOMIC_LONG_INC_DEC_OP(inc, _acquire)
+ATOMIC_LONG_INC_DEC_OP(inc, _release)
+ATOMIC_LONG_INC_DEC_OP(dec,)
+ATOMIC_LONG_INC_DEC_OP(dec, _relaxed)
+ATOMIC_LONG_INC_DEC_OP(dec, _acquire)
+ATOMIC_LONG_INC_DEC_OP(dec, _release)
+
+#undef ATOMIC_LONG_INC_DEC_OP
 
 static inline long atomic_long_add_unless(atomic_long_t *l, long a, long u)
 {
diff --git a/include/linux/atomic.h b/include/linux/atomic.h
index e326469..27e580d 100644
--- a/include/linux/atomic.h
+++ b/include/linux/atomic.h
@@ -90,6 +90,30 @@ static inline int atomic_read_ctrl(const atomic_t *v)
 #endif
 #endif /* atomic_add_return_relaxed */
 
+/* atomic_inc_return_relaxed */
+#ifndef atomic_inc_return_relaxed
+#define  atomic_inc_return_relaxed	atomic_inc_return
+#define  atomic_inc_return_acquire	atomic_inc_return
+#define  atomic_inc_return_release	atomic_inc_return
+
+#else /* atomic_inc_return_relaxed */
+
+#ifndef atomic_inc_return_acquire
+#define  atomic_inc_return_acquire(...)					\
+	__atomic_op_acquire(atomic_inc_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+
+#ifndef atomic_inc_return_release
+#define  atomic_inc_return_release(...)					\
+	__atomic_op_release(atomic_inc_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+
+#ifndef atomic_inc_return
+#define  atomic_inc_return(...)						\
+	__atomic_op_fence(atomic_inc_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+#endif /* atomic_inc_return_relaxed */
+
 /* atomic_sub_return_relaxed */
 #ifndef atomic_sub_return_relaxed
 #define  atomic_sub_return_relaxed	atomic_sub_return
@@ -114,6 +138,30 @@ static inline int atomic_read_ctrl(const atomic_t *v)
 #endif
 #endif /* atomic_sub_return_relaxed */
 
+/* atomic_dec_return_relaxed */
+#ifndef atomic_dec_return_relaxed
+#define  atomic_dec_return_relaxed	atomic_dec_return
+#define  atomic_dec_return_acquire	atomic_dec_return
+#define  atomic_dec_return_release	atomic_dec_return
+
+#else /* atomic_dec_return_relaxed */
+
+#ifndef atomic_dec_return_acquire
+#define  atomic_dec_return_acquire(...)					\
+	__atomic_op_acquire(atomic_dec_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+
+#ifndef atomic_dec_return_release
+#define  atomic_dec_return_release(...)					\
+	__atomic_op_release(atomic_dec_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+
+#ifndef atomic_dec_return
+#define  atomic_dec_return(...)						\
+	__atomic_op_fence(atomic_dec_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+#endif /* atomic_dec_return_relaxed */
+
 /* atomic_xchg_relaxed */
 #ifndef atomic_xchg_relaxed
 #define  atomic_xchg_relaxed		atomic_xchg
@@ -194,6 +242,31 @@ static inline int atomic_read_ctrl(const atomic_t *v)
 #endif
 #endif /* atomic64_add_return_relaxed */
 
+/* atomic64_inc_return_relaxed */
+#ifndef atomic64_inc_return_relaxed
+#define  atomic64_inc_return_relaxed	atomic64_inc_return
+#define  atomic64_inc_return_acquire	atomic64_inc_return
+#define  atomic64_inc_return_release	atomic64_inc_return
+
+#else /* atomic64_inc_return_relaxed */
+
+#ifndef atomic64_inc_return_acquire
+#define  atomic64_inc_return_acquire(...)				\
+	__atomic_op_acquire(atomic64_inc_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+
+#ifndef atomic64_inc_return_release
+#define  atomic64_inc_return_release(...)				\
+	__atomic_op_release(atomic64_inc_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+
+#ifndef atomic64_inc_return
+#define  atomic64_inc_return(...)					\
+	__atomic_op_fence(atomic64_inc_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+#endif /* atomic64_inc_return_relaxed */
+
+
 /* atomic64_sub_return_relaxed */
 #ifndef atomic64_sub_return_relaxed
 #define  atomic64_sub_return_relaxed	atomic64_sub_return
@@ -218,6 +291,30 @@ static inline int atomic_read_ctrl(const atomic_t *v)
 #endif
 #endif /* atomic64_sub_return_relaxed */
 
+/* atomic64_dec_return_relaxed */
+#ifndef atomic64_dec_return_relaxed
+#define  atomic64_dec_return_relaxed	atomic64_dec_return
+#define  atomic64_dec_return_acquire	atomic64_dec_return
+#define  atomic64_dec_return_release	atomic64_dec_return
+
+#else /* atomic64_dec_return_relaxed */
+
+#ifndef atomic64_dec_return_acquire
+#define  atomic64_dec_return_acquire(...)				\
+	__atomic_op_acquire(atomic64_dec_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+
+#ifndef atomic64_dec_return_release
+#define  atomic64_dec_return_release(...)				\
+	__atomic_op_release(atomic64_dec_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+
+#ifndef atomic64_dec_return
+#define  atomic64_dec_return(...)					\
+	__atomic_op_fence(atomic64_dec_return, __VA_ARGS__)
+#endif
+#endif /* atomic64_dec_return_relaxed */
+
 /* atomic64_xchg_relaxed */
 #ifndef atomic64_xchg_relaxed
 #define  atomic64_xchg_relaxed		atomic64_xchg
-- 
2.1.4

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1237035 — Re: [PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for inc/dec atomics

FromPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date2015-10-01 08:40 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for inc/dec atomics
Message-ID<qeFH5-4bi-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1236725
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 01:03:11PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> Similar to what we have for regular add/sub calls. For now, no actual arch
> implements them, so everyone falls back to the default atomics... iow,
> nothing changes. These will be used in future primitives.
> 

Maybe also do an aargh64 patch for this?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1239786 — Re: [PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for inc/dec atomics

FromWill Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Date2015-10-05 19:40 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for inc/dec atomics
Message-ID<qghTX-5HU-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1237035
On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 07:39:10AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 01:03:11PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > Similar to what we have for regular add/sub calls. For now, no actual arch
> > implements them, so everyone falls back to the default atomics... iow,
> > nothing changes. These will be used in future primitives.
> > 
> 
> Maybe also do an aargh64 patch for this?

I can follow up with that, since I'm about 60% through adding the
relaxed/acquire/release versions of all the other primitives. It's a fair
amount of work thanks to the new atomic instructions making me do everything
twice... (that and I've been on holiday this past week!)

Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1239900 — Re: [PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for inc/dec atomics

FromPeter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date2015-10-05 21:50 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/5] asm-generic: Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for inc/dec atomics
Message-ID<qgjVM-8O-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1239786
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 06:32:43PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 07:39:10AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 01:03:11PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > > Similar to what we have for regular add/sub calls. For now, no actual arch
> > > implements them, so everyone falls back to the default atomics... iow,
> > > nothing changes. These will be used in future primitives.
> > > 
> > 
> > Maybe also do an aargh64 patch for this?
> 
> I can follow up with that, since I'm about 60% through adding the
> relaxed/acquire/release versions of all the other primitives. It's a fair
> amount of work thanks to the new atomic instructions making me do everything
> twice... (that and I've been on holiday this past week!)

Right, what I meant was arm (I thought argh64 was the one with _relaxed
bits in, but my memories tricked me, it was ARM).

If you add new _relaxed ops, we'd better convert all archs that support
_relaxed, which would be ARM (for now).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1236726 — [PATCH 3/5] locking/rtmutex: Use acquire/release semantics

FromDavidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Date2015-09-30 22:10 +0200
Subject[PATCH 3/5] locking/rtmutex: Use acquire/release semantics
Message-ID<qevRo-6TJ-27@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1236722
As of 654672d4ba1 (locking/atomics: Add _{acquire|release|relaxed}()
variants of some atomic operations) and 6d79ef2d30e (locking, asm-generic:
Add _{relaxed|acquire|release}() variants for 'atomic_long_t'), weakly
ordered archs can benefit from more relaxed use of barriers when locking
and unlocking, instead of regular full barrier semantics. While currently
only arm64 supports such optimizations, updating corresponding locking
primitives serves for other archs to immediately benefit as well, once the
necessary machinery is implemented of course.

Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
---
 kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index 35e9bfc..8251e75 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -74,14 +74,23 @@ static void fixup_rt_mutex_waiters(struct rt_mutex *lock)
  * set up.
  */
 #ifndef CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES
-# define rt_mutex_cmpxchg(l,c,n)	(cmpxchg(&l->owner, c, n) == c)
+# define rt_mutex_cmpxchg_relaxed(l,c,n) (cmpxchg_relaxed(&l->owner, c, n) == c)
+# define rt_mutex_cmpxchg_acquire(l,c,n) (cmpxchg_acquire(&l->owner, c, n) == c)
+# define rt_mutex_cmpxchg_release(l,c,n) (cmpxchg_release(&l->owner, c, n) == c)
+
+/*
+ * Callers must hold the ->wait_lock -- which is the whole purpose as we force
+ * all future threads that attempt to [Rmw] the lock to the slowpath. As such
+ * relaxed semantics suffice.
+ */
 static inline void mark_rt_mutex_waiters(struct rt_mutex *lock)
 {
 	unsigned long owner, *p = (unsigned long *) &lock->owner;
 
 	do {
 		owner = *p;
-	} while (cmpxchg(p, owner, owner | RT_MUTEX_HAS_WAITERS) != owner);
+	} while (cmpxchg_relaxed(p, owner,
+				 owner | RT_MUTEX_HAS_WAITERS) != owner);
 }
 
 /*
@@ -121,11 +130,14 @@ static inline bool unlock_rt_mutex_safe(struct rt_mutex *lock)
 	 *					lock(wait_lock);
 	 *					acquire(lock);
 	 */
-	return rt_mutex_cmpxchg(lock, owner, NULL);
+	return rt_mutex_cmpxchg_release(lock, owner, NULL);
 }
 
 #else
-# define rt_mutex_cmpxchg(l,c,n)	(0)
+# define rt_mutex_cmpxchg_relaxed(l,c,n)	(0)
+# define rt_mutex_cmpxchg_acquire(l,c,n)	(0)
+# define rt_mutex_cmpxchg_release(l,c,n)	(0)
+
 static inline void mark_rt_mutex_waiters(struct rt_mutex *lock)
 {
 	lock->owner = (struct task_struct *)
@@ -1322,7 +1334,7 @@ rt_mutex_fastlock(struct rt_mutex *lock, int state,
 				struct hrtimer_sleeper *timeout,
 				enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk))
 {
-	if (likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg(lock, NULL, current))) {
+	if (likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg_acquire(lock, NULL, current))) {
 		rt_mutex_deadlock_account_lock(lock, current);
 		return 0;
 	} else
@@ -1338,7 +1350,7 @@ rt_mutex_timed_fastlock(struct rt_mutex *lock, int state,
 				      enum rtmutex_chainwalk chwalk))
 {
 	if (chwalk == RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK &&
-	    likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg(lock, NULL, current))) {
+	    likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg_acquire(lock, NULL, current))) {
 		rt_mutex_deadlock_account_lock(lock, current);
 		return 0;
 	} else
@@ -1349,7 +1361,7 @@ static inline int
 rt_mutex_fasttrylock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
 		     int (*slowfn)(struct rt_mutex *lock))
 {
-	if (likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg(lock, NULL, current))) {
+	if (likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg_acquire(lock, NULL, current))) {
 		rt_mutex_deadlock_account_lock(lock, current);
 		return 1;
 	}
@@ -1363,7 +1375,7 @@ rt_mutex_fastunlock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
 {
 	WAKE_Q(wake_q);
 
-	if (likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg(lock, current, NULL))) {
+	if (likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg_release(lock, current, NULL))) {
 		rt_mutex_deadlock_account_unlock(current);
 
 	} else {
@@ -1485,7 +1497,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rt_mutex_unlock);
 bool __sched rt_mutex_futex_unlock(struct rt_mutex *lock,
 				   struct wake_q_head *wqh)
 {
-	if (likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg(lock, current, NULL))) {
+	if (likely(rt_mutex_cmpxchg_release(lock, current, NULL))) {
 		rt_mutex_deadlock_account_unlock(current);
 		return false;
 	}
-- 
2.1.4

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1236741

FromThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Date2015-09-30 22:40 +0200
Message-ID<qewkq-7rR-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1236722
On Wed, 30 Sep 2015, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> This series continues porting users to Will's new _{acquire|release|relaxed}
> optimizations for weakly ordered archs -- and in practice, arm64 being the only
> actual user we have, thus could use a _lot_ more testing. While we have osq in
> -tip recently, along with Waiman's one for native qspinlocks, the following
> patches pretty much complete the move over for all things kernel/locking/*.
> Of course, particular primitives can be found in the obvious patch titles. Note
> that patch 1 adds the necessary machinery to fully support some locks, such as
> rwsems.

Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web