Re: [patch 2/4] lglock: introduce special lglock and brlock spinlocks

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 04:43:09PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> This patch introduces "local-global" locks (lglocks). These can be used to:
> 
> - Provide fast exclusive access to per-CPU data, with exclusive access to
>   another CPU's data allowed but possibly subject to contention, and to provide
>   very slow exclusive access to all per-CPU data.
> - Or to provide very fast and scalable read serialisation, and to provide
>   very slow exclusive serialisation of data (not necessarily per-CPU data).
> 
> Brlocks are also implemented as a short-hand notation for the latter use
> case.
> 
> Thanks to Paul for local/global naming convention.

;-)

One set of questions about how this relates to real-time below.

(And I agree with Eric's point about for_each_possible_cpu(), FWIW.)

> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@xxxxxxxxxx>,
> Cc: John Stultz <johnstul@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  include/linux/lglock.h |  165 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 165 insertions(+)
> 
> Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/lglock.h
> ===================================================================
> --- /dev/null
> +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/lglock.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@
> +/*
> + * Specialised local-global spinlock. Can only be declared as global variables
> + * to avoid overhead and keep things simple (and we don't want to start using
> + * these inside dynamically allocated structures).
> + *
> + * "local/global locks" (lglocks) can be used to:
> + *
> + * - Provide fast exclusive access to per-CPU data, with exclusive access to
> + *   another CPU's data allowed but possibly subject to contention, and to
> + *   provide very slow exclusive access to all per-CPU data.
> + * - Or to provide very fast and scalable read serialisation, and to provide
> + *   very slow exclusive serialisation of data (not necessarily per-CPU data).
> + *
> + * Brlocks are also implemented as a short-hand notation for the latter use
> + * case.
> + *
> + * Copyright 2009, 2010, Nick Piggin, Novell Inc.
> + */
> +#ifndef __LINUX_LGLOCK_H
> +#define __LINUX_LGLOCK_H
> +
> +#include <linux/spinlock.h>
> +#include <linux/lockdep.h>
> +#include <linux/percpu.h>
> +#include <asm/atomic.h>
> +
> +/* can make br locks by using local lock for read side, global lock for write */
> +#define br_lock_init(name)	name##_lock_init()
> +#define br_read_lock(name)	name##_local_lock()
> +#define br_read_unlock(name)	name##_local_unlock()
> +#define br_write_lock(name)	name##_global_lock()
> +#define br_write_unlock(name)	name##_global_unlock()
> +#define atomic_dec_and_br_write_lock(atomic, name)	name##_atomic_dec_and_global_lock(atomic)
> +
> +#define DECLARE_BRLOCK(name)	DECLARE_LGLOCK(name)
> +#define DEFINE_BRLOCK(name)	DEFINE_LGLOCK(name)
> +
> +
> +#define lg_lock_init(name)	name##_lock_init()
> +#define lg_local_lock(name)	name##_local_lock()
> +#define lg_local_unlock(name)	name##_local_unlock()
> +#define lg_local_lock_cpu(name, cpu)	name##_local_lock_cpu(cpu)
> +#define lg_local_unlock_cpu(name, cpu)	name##_local_unlock_cpu(cpu)
> +#define lg_global_lock(name)	name##_global_lock()
> +#define lg_global_unlock(name)	name##_global_unlock()
> +#define atomic_dec_and_lg_global_lock(atomic, name)	name##_atomic_dec_and_global_lock(atomic)
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
> +#define LOCKDEP_INIT_MAP lockdep_init_map
> +
> +#define DEFINE_LGLOCK_LOCKDEP(name)					\
> + struct lock_class_key name##_lock_key;					\
> + struct lockdep_map name##_lock_dep_map;				\
> + EXPORT_SYMBOL(name##_lock_dep_map)
> +
> +#else
> +#define LOCKDEP_INIT_MAP(a, b, c, d)
> +
> +#define DEFINE_LGLOCK_LOCKDEP(name)
> +#endif
> +
> +
> +#define DECLARE_LGLOCK(name)						\
> + extern void name##_lock_init(void);					\
> + extern void name##_local_lock(void);					\
> + extern void name##_local_unlock(void);					\
> + extern void name##_local_lock_cpu(int cpu);				\
> + extern void name##_local_unlock_cpu(int cpu);				\
> + extern void name##_global_lock(void);					\
> + extern void name##_global_unlock(void);				\
> + extern int name##_atomic_dec_and_global_lock(atomic_t *a);		\
> +
> +#define DEFINE_LGLOCK(name)						\
> +									\
> + DEFINE_PER_CPU(arch_spinlock_t, name##_lock);				\
> + DEFINE_LGLOCK_LOCKDEP(name);						\
> +									\
> + void name##_lock_init(void) {						\
> +	int i;								\
> +	LOCKDEP_INIT_MAP(&name##_lock_dep_map, #name, &name##_lock_key, 0); \
> +	for_each_possible_cpu(i) {					\
> +		arch_spinlock_t *lock;					\
> +		lock = &per_cpu(name##_lock, i);			\
> +		*lock = (arch_spinlock_t)__ARCH_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;	\
> +	}								\
> + }									\
> + EXPORT_SYMBOL(name##_lock_init);					\
> +									\
> + void name##_local_lock(void) {						\
> +	arch_spinlock_t *lock;						\
> +	preempt_disable();						\

In a -rt kernel, I believe we would not want the above preempt_disable().
Of course, in this case the arch_spin_lock() would need to become
spin_lock() or some such.

The main point of this approach is to avoid cross-CPU holding of these
locks, correct?  And then the point of arch_spin_lock() is to avoid the
redundant preempt_disable(), right?

							Thanx, Paul

> +	rwlock_acquire_read(&name##_lock_dep_map, 0, 0, _THIS_IP_);	\
> +	lock = &__get_cpu_var(name##_lock);				\
> +	arch_spin_lock(lock);						\
> + }									\
> + EXPORT_SYMBOL(name##_local_lock);					\
> +									\
> + void name##_local_unlock(void) {					\
> +	arch_spinlock_t *lock;						\
> +	rwlock_release(&name##_lock_dep_map, 1, _THIS_IP_);		\
> +	lock = &__get_cpu_var(name##_lock);				\
> +	arch_spin_unlock(lock);						\
> +	preempt_enable();						\
> + }									\
> + EXPORT_SYMBOL(name##_local_unlock);					\
> +									\
> + void name##_local_lock_cpu(int cpu) {			\
> +	arch_spinlock_t *lock;						\
> +	preempt_disable();						\
> +	rwlock_acquire_read(&name##_lock_dep_map, 0, 0, _THIS_IP_);	\
> +	lock = &per_cpu(name##_lock, cpu);				\
> +	arch_spin_lock(lock);						\
> + }									\
> + EXPORT_SYMBOL(name##_local_lock_cpu);					\
> +									\
> + void name##_local_unlock_cpu(int cpu) {			\
> +	arch_spinlock_t *lock;						\
> +	rwlock_release(&name##_lock_dep_map, 1, _THIS_IP_);		\
> +	lock = &per_cpu(name##_lock, cpu);				\
> +	arch_spin_unlock(lock);						\
> +	preempt_enable();						\
> + }									\
> + EXPORT_SYMBOL(name##_local_unlock_cpu);				\
> +									\
> + void name##_global_lock(void) {					\
> +	int i;								\
> +	preempt_disable();						\
> +	rwlock_acquire(&name##_lock_dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_);		\
> +	for_each_online_cpu(i) {					\
> +		arch_spinlock_t *lock;					\
> +		lock = &per_cpu(name##_lock, i);			\
> +		arch_spin_lock(lock);					\
> +	}								\
> + }									\
> + EXPORT_SYMBOL(name##_global_lock);					\
> +									\
> + void name##_global_unlock(void) {					\
> +	int i;								\
> +	rwlock_release(&name##_lock_dep_map, 1, _RET_IP_);		\
> +	for_each_online_cpu(i) {					\
> +		arch_spinlock_t *lock;					\
> +		lock = &per_cpu(name##_lock, i);			\
> +		arch_spin_unlock(lock);					\
> +	}								\
> +	preempt_enable();						\
> + }									\
> + EXPORT_SYMBOL(name##_global_unlock);					\
> +									\
> + static int name##_atomic_dec_and_global_lock__failed(atomic_t *a) {	\
> +	name##_global_lock();						\
> +	if (!atomic_dec_and_test(a)) {					\
> +		name##_global_unlock();					\
> +		return 0;						\
> +	}								\
> +	return 1;							\
> + }									\
> + 									\
> + int name##_atomic_dec_and_global_lock(atomic_t *a) {			\
> +	if (likely(atomic_add_unless(a, -1, 1)))			\
> +		return 0;						\
> +	return name##_atomic_dec_and_global_lock__failed(a);		\
> + }									\
> + EXPORT_SYMBOL(name##_atomic_dec_and_global_lock);
> +
> +#endif
> 
> 
--
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/