Re: [PATCH] mutexes: Add CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEX_FASTPATH=y debug variantto debug SMP races

From: Waiman Long
Date: Wed Dec 11 2013 - 10:37:49 EST


On 12/03/2013 03:52 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
*
I think we try that, to make mutexes safer in general.

Can you see a way to do that fairly cheaply?

I can see two approaches, both rather radical:

1)

Eliminate mutex->count and (ab-)use mutex->wait_lock as 'the' mutex
lock: with TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG used to denote waiters or so and care
taken to not use it as a 'real' spinlock but use the raw accessors.

This would still allow a good mutex_lock() fastpath, as it would
essentially become spin_trylock() with an asm goto slow path helper
perhaps.

Doing this would have various advantages:

- we'd eliminate much (all?) of per arch mutex code
- we'd share spinlock and mutex low level implementations
- we'd reduce struct mutex size by 4 bytes

It's still early in the morning so I might be missing something
trivial though - this sounds suspiciously too easy ;-) Having a proper
mutex slowpath might not be so easy without changing the spinlock
code.

2)

Another method would be to do the opposite: eliminate mutex->wait_lock
[for the non-debug case] and do everything via mutex->count and
mutex->owner.

This saves even more space and potentially enables a tighter slowpath.

It probably won't hurt the massively parallel case, as we already do
smart MCS locking via mutex->spin_mlock.

So I'd argue for #2. (Assuming it addresses the problem)

Thanks,

Ingo



I also think that #2 is safer as messing with spinlock code can be risky. However, #2 probably won't work for architectures that use the generic mutex-xchg.h fastpath. Currently the following architectures use mutex-xchg.h - unicore32, arc, arm and hexagon. Is there a reason why they cannot be converted to use mutex-dec.h instead?

-Longman


--
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/