Re: [PATCH][RESEND] scalable rw_mutex

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Fri Aug 08 2008 - 06:21:20 EST


On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 18:56 -0400, Ryan Hope wrote:
> This was posted sometime last year I think and it never got merged. Can this get
> a go around in -mm, it would help in converting the semaphore's in reiser4 to
> mutexes.

Thanks for CC'ing me :-/

I dropped it because its only more scalable up to around 4 cpus.

Also, how would it help reiser4? using rwsems is perfectly fine - as
they aren't actual semaphores.

> diff --git a/include/linux/rwmutex.h b/include/linux/rwmutex.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..39ec857
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/rwmutex.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
> +/*
> + * Scalable reader/writer lock.
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2007 Red Hat, Inc., Peter Zijlstra <pzijlstr@xxxxxxxxxx>
> + *
> + * This file contains the public data structure and API definitions.
> + */
> +#ifndef _LINUX_RWMUTEX_H
> +#define _LINUX_RWMUTEX_H
> +
> +#include <linux/preempt.h>
> +#include <linux/wait.h>
> +#include <linux/percpu_counter.h>
> +#include <linux/lockdep.h>
> +#include <linux/mutex.h>
> +#include <asm/atomic.h>
> +
> +struct rw_mutex {
> + /* Read mostly global */
> + struct percpu_counter readers;
> + unsigned int status;
> +
> + /* The following variables are only for the slowpath */
> + struct mutex read_mutex; /* r -> w waiting */
> + struct mutex write_mutex; /* w -> w waiting */
> + struct task_struct *waiter; /* w -> r waiting */
> + atomic_t read_waiters;
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
> + struct lockdep_map dep_map;
> +#endif
> +};
> +
> +void __rw_mutex_init(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex, const char * name,
> + struct lock_class_key *key);
> +void rw_mutex_destroy(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex);
> +
> +#define rw_mutex_init(rw_mutex) \
> + do { \
> + static struct lock_class_key __key; \
> + __rw_mutex_init((rw_mutex), #rw_mutex, &__key); \
> + } while (0)
> +
> +void rw_mutex_read_lock_slow(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex);
> +
> +void rw_mutex_write_lock_nested(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex, int subclass);
> +void rw_mutex_write_unlock(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex);
> +
> +int __rw_mutex_read_trylock(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex);
> +
> +static inline int rw_mutex_read_trylock(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + int ret = __rw_mutex_read_trylock(rw_mutex);
> + if (ret)
> + rwsem_acquire_read(&rw_mutex->dep_map, 0, 1, _RET_IP_);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void rw_mutex_read_lock(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + might_sleep();
> + rwsem_acquire_read(&rw_mutex->dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_);
> +
> + ret = __rw_mutex_read_trylock(rw_mutex);
> + if (!ret)
> + rw_mutex_read_lock_slow(rw_mutex);
> +}
> +
> +void rw_mutex_read_unlock(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex);
> +
> +static inline int rw_mutex_is_locked(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + return mutex_is_locked(&rw_mutex->write_mutex);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void rw_mutex_write_lock(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + rw_mutex_write_lock_nested(rw_mutex, 0);
> +}
> +
> +#endif /* _LINUX_RWMUTEX_H */
> diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile
> index dd58bdc..8277ef5 100644
> --- a/kernel/Makefile
> +++ b/kernel/Makefile
> @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ obj-y = sched.o fork.o exec_domain.o panic.o printk.o \
> rcupdate.o extable.o params.o posix-timers.o \
> kthread.o wait.o kfifo.o sys_ni.o posix-cpu-timers.o mutex.o \
> hrtimer.o rwsem.o nsproxy.o srcu.o semaphore.o \
> - notifier.o ksysfs.o pm_qos_params.o sched_clock.o
> + notifier.o ksysfs.o pm_qos_params.o sched_clock.o rwmutex.o
>
> CFLAGS_REMOVE_sched.o = -mno-spe
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rwmutex.c b/kernel/rwmutex.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..2b82d11
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/kernel/rwmutex.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,256 @@
> +/*
> + * Scalable reader/writer lock.
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2007 Red Hat, Inc., Peter Zijlstra <pzijlstr@xxxxxxxxxx>
> + *
> + * Its scalable in that the read count is a percpu counter and the reader fast
> + * path does not write to a shared cache-line.
> + *
> + * Its not FIFO fair, but starvation proof by alternating readers and writers.
> + */
> +#include <linux/sched.h>
> +#include <linux/rwmutex.h>
> +#include <linux/debug_locks.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +
> +/*
> + * rw mutex - oxymoron when we take mutex to stand for 'MUTual EXlusion'
> + *
> + * However in this context we take mutex to mean a sleeping lock, with the
> + * property that it must be released by the same context that acquired it.
> + *
> + * design goals:
> + *
> + * A sleeping reader writer lock with a scalable read side, to avoid bouncing
> + * cache-lines.
> + *
> + * dynamics:
> + *
> + * The reader fast path is modification of a percpu_counter and a read of a
> + * shared cache-line.
> + *
> + * The write side is quite heavy; it takes two mutexes, a writer mutex and a
> + * readers mutex. The writer mutex is for w <-> w interaction, the read mutex
> + * for r -> w. The read side is forced into the slow path by setting the
> + * status bit. Then it waits for all current readers to disappear.
> + *
> + * The read lock slow path; taken when the status bit is set; takes the read
> + * mutex. Because the write side also takes this mutex, the new readers are
> + * blocked. The read unlock slow path tickles the writer every time a read
> + * lock is released.
> + *
> + * Write unlock clears the status bit, and drops the read mutex; allowing new
> + * readers. It then waits for at least one waiting reader to get a lock (if
> + * there were any readers waiting) before releasing the write mutex which will
> + * allow possible other writers to come in an stop new readers, thus avoiding
> + * starvation by alternating between readers and writers
> + *
> + * considerations:
> + *
> + * The lock's space footprint is quite large (on x86_64):
> + *
> + * 96 bytes [struct rw_mutex]
> + * 8 bytes per cpu NR_CPUS [void *]
> + * 32 bytes per cpu (NR_CPUS ?= cpu_possible_map ?= nr_cpu_ids)
> + * [smallest slab]
> + *
> + * 1376 bytes for x86_64 defconfig (NR_CPUS = 32)
> + */
> +
> +#define RW_MUTEX_READER_FAST 0
> +#define RW_MUTEX_READER_SLOW 1
> +
> +void __rw_mutex_init(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex, const char *name,
> + struct lock_class_key *key)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
> + debug_check_no_locks_freed((void *)rw_mutex, sizeof(*rw_mutex));
> + lockdep_init_map(&rw_mutex->dep_map, name, key, 0);
> +#endif
> +
> + percpu_counter_init(&rw_mutex->readers, 0);
> + rw_mutex->status = RW_MUTEX_READER_FAST;
> + mutex_init(&rw_mutex->read_mutex);
> + mutex_init(&rw_mutex->write_mutex);
> + rw_mutex->waiter = NULL;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
> + printk("rw_mutex size: %u\n", sizeof(struct rw_mutex));
> +#endif
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__rw_mutex_init);
> +
> +void rw_mutex_destroy(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + percpu_counter_destroy(&rw_mutex->readers);
> + mutex_destroy(&rw_mutex->read_mutex);
> + mutex_destroy(&rw_mutex->write_mutex);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(rw_mutex_destroy);
> +
> +static inline void rw_mutex_readers_inc(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + percpu_counter_inc(&rw_mutex->readers);
> + smp_wmb();
> +}
> +
> +static inline void rw_mutex_readers_dec(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + percpu_counter_dec(&rw_mutex->readers);
> + smp_wmb();
> +}
> +
> +static inline long rw_mutex_readers(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + smp_rmb();
> + return percpu_counter_sum(&rw_mutex->readers);
> +}
> +
> +#define rw_mutex_writer_wait(rw_mutex, condition) \
> +do { \
> + struct task_struct *tsk = current; \
> + \
> + BUG_ON((rw_mutex)->waiter); \
> + set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); \
> + get_task_struct(tsk); \
> + (rw_mutex)->waiter = tsk; \
> + smp_wmb(); \
> + while (!(condition)) { \
> + schedule(); \
> + set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); \
> + } \
> + tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING; \
> + (rw_mutex)->waiter = NULL; \
> + put_task_struct(tsk); \
> +} while (0)
> +
> +static inline void rw_mutex_writer_wake(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + struct task_struct *tsk;
> +
> + smp_rmb();
> + tsk = rw_mutex->waiter;
> + if (tsk)
> + wake_up_process(tsk);
> +}
> +
> +void rw_mutex_read_lock_slow(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + /*
> + * read lock slow path;
> + * count the number of readers waiting on the read_mutex
> + */
> + atomic_inc(&rw_mutex->read_waiters);
> + mutex_lock(&rw_mutex->read_mutex);
> +
> + /*
> + * rw_mutex->state is only set while the read_mutex is held
> + * so by serialising on this lock, we're sure its free.
> + */
> + BUG_ON(rw_mutex->status);
> +
> + rw_mutex_readers_inc(rw_mutex);
> +
> + /*
> + * wake up a possible write unlock; waiting for at least a single
> + * reader to pass before letting a new writer through.
> + */
> + atomic_dec(&rw_mutex->read_waiters);
> + rw_mutex_writer_wake(rw_mutex);
> + mutex_unlock(&rw_mutex->read_mutex);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(rw_mutex_read_lock_slow);
> +
> +static inline
> +void rw_mutex_status_set(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex, unsigned int status)
> +{
> + rw_mutex->status = status;
> + /*
> + * allow new readers to see this change in status
> + */
> + smp_wmb();
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned int rw_mutex_reader_slow(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + /*
> + * match rw_mutex_status_set()
> + */
> + smp_rmb();
> + return rw_mutex->status;
> +}
> +
> +int __rw_mutex_read_trylock(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + rw_mutex_readers_inc(rw_mutex);
> + if (unlikely(rw_mutex_reader_slow(rw_mutex))) {
> + rw_mutex_readers_dec(rw_mutex);
> + /*
> + * possibly wake up a writer waiting for this reference to
> + * disappear
> + */
> + rw_mutex_writer_wake(rw_mutex);
> + return 0;
> + }
> + return 1;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__rw_mutex_read_trylock);
> +
> +void rw_mutex_read_unlock(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + rwsem_release(&rw_mutex->dep_map, 1, _RET_IP_);
> +
> + rw_mutex_readers_dec(rw_mutex);
> + /*
> + * on the slow path;
> + * nudge the writer waiting for the last reader to go away
> + */
> + if (unlikely(rw_mutex_reader_slow(rw_mutex)))
> + rw_mutex_writer_wake(rw_mutex);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(rw_mutex_read_unlock);
> +
> +void rw_mutex_write_lock_nested(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex, int subclass)
> +{
> + might_sleep();
> + rwsem_acquire(&rw_mutex->dep_map, subclass, 0, _RET_IP_);
> +
> + mutex_lock_nested(&rw_mutex->write_mutex, subclass);
> +
> + /*
> + * block new readers
> + */
> + mutex_lock_nested(&rw_mutex->read_mutex, subclass);
> + rw_mutex_status_set(rw_mutex, RW_MUTEX_READER_SLOW);
> + /*
> + * and wait for all current readers to go away
> + */
> + rw_mutex_writer_wait(rw_mutex, (rw_mutex_readers(rw_mutex) == 0));
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(rw_mutex_write_lock_nested);
> +
> +void rw_mutex_write_unlock(struct rw_mutex *rw_mutex)
> +{
> + int waiters;
> +
> + might_sleep();
> + rwsem_release(&rw_mutex->dep_map, 1, _RET_IP_);
> +
> + /*
> + * let the readers rip
> + */
> + rw_mutex_status_set(rw_mutex, RW_MUTEX_READER_FAST);
> + waiters = atomic_read(&rw_mutex->read_waiters);
> + mutex_unlock(&rw_mutex->read_mutex);
> + /*
> + * wait for at least 1 reader to get through
> + */
> + if (waiters) {
> + rw_mutex_writer_wait(rw_mutex,
> + (atomic_read(&rw_mutex->read_waiters) < waiters));
> + }
> + /*
> + * before we let the writers rip
> + */
> + mutex_unlock(&rw_mutex->write_mutex);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(rw_mutex_write_unlock);
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

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