Re: [PATCH] mutex: have non-spinning mutexes on s390 by default

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-04-09 at 18:53 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
>   
> > I was looking at how an monitor-wait could be used here, but that
> > appears non-trivial, there's two variables we're watching, lock->owner
> > and rq->curr, either could change.
> >
> > Reducing that to 1 seems an interesting problem :-)
> >     
>
> How about something like this?
>
> Does it make sense to implement an monitor-wait spinlock for the virt
> case as well? Avi, Jeremy?
>   

Last time I tried to put mwait in a spinlock, Arjan (or HPA?) said that 
mwait takes approx a week and a half to wake up, and that it was really 
only useful for idle power savings.

Has that changed?

Aside from that, using mwait directly doesn't really help PV Xen much 
(it never an available CPU feature); we'd need a higher-level hook to 
implement something else to block the vcpu.

   J

> ---
>  arch/Kconfig                     |    3 +++
>  arch/x86/Kconfig                 |    1 +
>  arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h |   21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/sched.h            |    2 ++
>  kernel/mutex.h                   |    1 +
>  kernel/sched.c                   |   27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  6 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconfig
> index dc81b34..67aa9f9 100644
> --- a/arch/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/Kconfig
> @@ -109,3 +109,6 @@ config HAVE_CLK
>  
>  config HAVE_DMA_API_DEBUG
>  	bool
> +
> +config HAVE_MUTEX_MWAIT
> +	bool
> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> index 2560fff..62d378b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ config X86
>  	select HAVE_KERNEL_LZMA
>  	select HAVE_ARCH_KMEMCHECK
>  	select HAVE_DMA_API_DEBUG
> +	select HAVE_MUTEX_MWAIT
>  
>  config ARCH_DEFCONFIG
>  	string
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
> index 7c39de7..c2617e4 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
> @@ -727,6 +727,27 @@ static inline void __sti_mwait(unsigned long eax, unsigned long ecx)
>  		     :: "a" (eax), "c" (ecx));
>  }
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +static inline void mutex_spin_monitor(void *addr)
> +{
> +	if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CLFLUSH_MONITOR))
> +		return;
> +
> +	__monitor(addr, 0, 0);
> +	smp_mb();
> +}
> +
> +static inline void mutex_spin_monitor_wait(void)
> +{
> +	if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CLFLUSH_MONITOR)) {
> +		cpu_relax();
> +		return;
> +	}
> +
> +	__mwait(0, 0);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
>  extern void mwait_idle_with_hints(unsigned long eax, unsigned long ecx);
>  
>  extern void select_idle_routine(const struct cpuinfo_x86 *c);
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 25bdac7..87f945e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -342,7 +342,9 @@ extern signed long schedule_timeout_killable(signed long timeout);
>  extern signed long schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(signed long timeout);
>  asmlinkage void __schedule(void);
>  asmlinkage void schedule(void);
> +
>  extern int mutex_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock, struct thread_info *owner);
> +extern void mutex_spin_unlock(void);
>  
>  struct nsproxy;
>  struct user_namespace;
> diff --git a/kernel/mutex.h b/kernel/mutex.h
> index 67578ca..c4d2d7a 100644
> --- a/kernel/mutex.h
> +++ b/kernel/mutex.h
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ static inline void mutex_set_owner(struct mutex *lock)
>  static inline void mutex_clear_owner(struct mutex *lock)
>  {
>  	lock->owner = NULL;
> +	mutex_spin_unlock();
>  }
>  #else
>  static inline void mutex_set_owner(struct mutex *lock)
> diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
> index f2cf383..f15af61 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -5184,6 +5184,28 @@ need_resched_nonpreemptible:
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(schedule);
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +
> +#ifndef CONFIG_HAVE_MUTEX_MWAIT
> +static inline void mutex_spin_monitor(void *addr)
> +{
> +}
> +
> +static inline void mutex_spin_monitor_wait(void)
> +{
> +	cpu_relax();
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> +void mutex_spin_unlock(void)
> +{
> +	/*
> +	 * XXX fix the below to now require as many ins
> +	 */
> +	preempt_disable();
> +	this_rq()->curr = current;
> +	preempt_enable();
> +}
> +
>  /*
>   * Look out! "owner" is an entirely speculative pointer
>   * access and not reliable.
> @@ -5225,6 +5247,9 @@ int mutex_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock, struct thread_info *owner)
>  	rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
>  
>  	for (;;) {
> +
> +		mutex_spin_monitor(&rq->curr);
> +
>  		/*
>  		 * Owner changed, break to re-assess state.
>  		 */
> @@ -5237,7 +5262,7 @@ int mutex_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock, struct thread_info *owner)
>  		if (task_thread_info(rq->curr) != owner || need_resched())
>  			return 0;
>  
> -		cpu_relax();
> +		mutex_spin_monitor_wait();
>  	}
>  out:
>  	return 1;
>
>   

--
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/