Re: Preemptable Ticket Spinlock

[Raghavendra K T]

On 04/23/2013 01:19 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 08:52 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On 04/22/2013 07:51 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2013-04-21 at 17:12 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > > If we always incremented the ticket number by 2 (instead of 1), then
> > > > we could use the lower bit of the ticket number as the spinlock.
> > >
> > > ISTR that paravirt ticket locks already do that and use the lsb to
> > > indicate the unlock needs to perform wakeups.
> > >
> > > Also, since all of this is virt nonsense, shouldn't it live in the
> > > paravirt ticket lock code and leave the native code as is?
> >
> > Sure, but that is still no reason not to have the virt
> > implementation be as fast as possible, and share the same
> > data type as the non-virt implementation.
>
> It has to share the same data-type..
>
> > Also, is it guaranteed that the native spin_lock code has
> > not been called yet before we switch over to the paravirt
> > functions?
> >
> > If the native spin_lock code has been called already at
> > that time, the native code would still need to be modified
> > to increment the ticket number by 2, so we end up with a
> > compatible value in each spin lock's .tickets field, and
> > prevent a deadlock after we switch over to the paravirt
> > variant.
>
> I thought the stuff already made it upstream, but apparently not; the
> lastest posting I'm aware of is here:
>
>    https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/5/2/105
>
> That stuff changes the normal ticket increment as well..

pv-ticket spinlock went on hold state, after Avi acked because of:

though on non-PLE, we get a huge advantage, on PLE machine the benefit 
was not as impressive (~10% as you stated in email chain) compared to 
the complexity of the patches.
So Avi suggested to try PLE improvements first, so they are going upstream.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/18/247
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/1/22/104
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/2/6/345 (on the way in kvm tree)

Current status of PV spinlock:
I have the rebased patches of pv spinlocks and experimenting with latest 
kernel.I have
Gleb's irq delivery incorporated into the patch series. But I am 
thinknig whether I can
improve some guest side logic in unlock.
I will probably setup a githup and post the link soon.

--
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/