Re: [PATCH v8 1/4] qrwlock: A queue read/write lock implementation
From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Fri Jan 10 2014 - 01:41:49 EST
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 11:59:33AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> This patch introduces a new read/write lock implementation that put
> waiting readers and writers into a queue instead of actively contending
> the lock like the current read/write lock implementation. This will
> improve performance in highly contended situation by reducing the
> cache line bouncing effect.
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> The queue read/write lock (qrwlock) is a fair lock even though there
> is still a slight chance of lock stealing if a reader or writer comes
> at the right moment. Other than that, lock granting is done in a
> FIFO manner. As a result, it is possible to determine a maximum time
> period after which the waiting is over and the lock can be acquired.
>
> Internally, however, there is a second type of readers which try to
> steal lock aggressively. They simply increments the reader count and
> wait until the writer releases the lock. The transition to aggressive
> reader happens in the read lock slowpath when
>
> 1. In an interrupt context.
> 2. When a reader comes to the head of the wait queue and sees
> the release of a write lock.
>
> The queue read lock is safe to use in an interrupt context (softirq
> or hardirq) as it will switch to become an aggressive reader in such
> environment allowing recursive read lock.
>
> The only downside of queue rwlock is the size increase in the lock
> structure by 4 bytes for 32-bit systems and by 12 bytes for 64-bit
> systems.
>
> In term of single-thread performance (no contention), a 256K
> lock/unlock loop was run on a 2.4GHz and 2.93Ghz Westmere x86-64
> CPUs. The following table shows the average time (in ns) for a single
> lock/unlock sequence (including the looping and timing overhead):
>
> Lock Type 2.4GHz 2.93GHz
> --------- ------ -------
> Ticket spinlock 14.9 12.3
> Read lock 17.0 13.5
> Write lock 17.0 13.5
> Queue read lock 16.0 13.4
> Queue write lock 9.2 7.8
>
> The queue read lock is slightly slower than the spinlock, but is
> slightly faster than the read lock. The queue write lock, however,
> is the fastest of all. It is almost twice as fast as the write lock
> and about 1.5X of the spinlock.
>
> With lock contention, the speed of each individual lock/unlock function
> is less important than the amount of contention-induced delays.
>
> To investigate the performance characteristics of the queue rwlock
> compared with the regular rwlock, Ingo's anon_vmas patch that converts
> rwsem to rwlock was applied to a 3.12 kernel. This kernel was then
> tested under the following 3 conditions:
>
> 1) Plain 3.12
> 2) Ingo's patch
> 3) Ingo's patch + qrwlock
>
> Each of the 3 kernels were booted up twice with and without the
> "idle=poll" kernel parameter which keeps the CPUs in C0 state while
> idling instead of a more energy-saving sleep state. The jobs per
> minutes (JPM) results of the AIM7's high_systime workload at 1500
> users on a 8-socket 80-core DL980 (HT off) were:
>
> Kernel JPMs %Change from (1)
> ------ ---- ----------------
> 1 145704/227295 -
> 2 229750/236066 +58%/+3.8%
> 4 240062/248606 +65%/+9.4%
>
> The first JPM number is without the "idle=poll" kernel parameter,
> the second number is with that parameter. It can be seen that most
> of the performance benefit of converting rwsem to rwlock actually
> come from the latency improvement of not needing to wake up a CPU
> from deep sleep state when work is available.
>
> The use of non-sleeping locks did improve performance by eliminating
> the context switching cost. Using queue rwlock gave almost tripling
> of performance gain. The performance gain was reduced somewhat with
> a fair lock which was to be expected.
>
> Looking at the perf profiles (with idle=poll) below, we can clearly see
> that other bottlenecks were constraining the performance improvement.
>
> Perf profile of kernel (2):
>
> 18.65% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __write_lock_failed
> 9.00% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> 5.21% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] cpu_idle_loop
> 3.08% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] mspin_lock
> 2.50% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] anon_vma_interval_tree_insert
> 2.00% ls [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> 1.29% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] update_cfs_rq_blocked_load
> 1.21% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __read_lock_failed
> 1.12% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock
> 1.10% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] perf_event_aux
> 1.09% true [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
>
> Perf profile of kernel (3):
>
> 20.14% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] cpu_idle_loop
> 7.94% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> 5.41% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] queue_write_lock_slowpath
> 5.01% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] mspin_lock
> 2.12% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] anon_vma_interval_tree_insert
> 2.07% ls [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> 1.58% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] update_cfs_rq_blocked_load
> 1.25% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] queue_write_3step_lock
> 1.18% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] queue_read_lock_slowpath
> 1.14% true [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> 0.95% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] mutex_spin_on_owner
>
> 20.55% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] cpu_idle_loop
> 7.74% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> 6.47% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] queue_write_lock_slowpath
> 4.41% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] mspin_lock
> 2.18% ls [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> 2.07% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] anon_vma_interval_tree_insert
> 1.49% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] update_cfs_rq_blocked_load
> 1.43% true [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> 1.17% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] queue_read_lock_slowpath
> 0.94% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] mutex_spin_on_owner
>
> The spinlock bottlenecks were shown below.
>
> 7.74% reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> |--65.94%-- release_pages
> |--31.37%-- pagevec_lru_move_fn
> |--0.79%-- get_page_from_freelist
> |--0.62%-- __page_cache_release
> --1.28%-- [...]
>
> For both release_pages() & pagevec_lru_move_fn() function, the
> spinlock contention was on zone->lru_lock.
>
> Tim Chen also tested the qrwlock with Ingo's patch on a 4-socket
> machine. It was found the performance improvement of 11% was the
> same with regular rwlock or queue rwlock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@xxxxxx>
> ---
> include/asm-generic/qrwlock.h | 208 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> kernel/Kconfig.locks | 7 +
> kernel/locking/Makefile | 1 +
> kernel/locking/qrwlock.c | 282 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 498 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 include/asm-generic/qrwlock.h
> create mode 100644 kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
>
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/qrwlock.h b/include/asm-generic/qrwlock.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..c26be3b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/qrwlock.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,208 @@
> +/*
> + * Queue read/write lock
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> + * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> + * (at your option) any later version.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
> + * GNU General Public License for more details.
> + *
> + * (C) Copyright 2013 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.
> + *
> + * Authors: Waiman Long <waiman.long@xxxxxx>
> + */
> +#ifndef __ASM_GENERIC_QRWLOCK_H
> +#define __ASM_GENERIC_QRWLOCK_H
> +
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/atomic.h>
> +#include <asm/bitops.h>
> +#include <asm/cmpxchg.h>
> +#include <asm/barrier.h>
> +#include <asm/processor.h>
> +#include <asm/byteorder.h>
> +
> +#if !defined(__LITTLE_ENDIAN) && !defined(__BIG_ENDIAN)
> +#error "Missing either LITTLE_ENDIAN or BIG_ENDIAN definition."
> +#endif
> +
> +/*
> + * The queue read/write lock data structure
> + *
> + * The layout of the structure is endian-sensitive to make sure that adding
> + * _QR_BIAS to the rw field to increment the reader count won't disturb
> + * the writer field. The least significant 8 bits is the writer field
> + * whereas the remaining 24 bits is the reader count.
> + */
> +struct qrwnode {
> + struct qrwnode *next;
> + bool wait; /* Waiting flag */
> +};
> +
> +typedef struct qrwlock {
> + union qrwcnts {
> + struct {
> +#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> + u8 writer; /* Writer state */
> +#else
> + u16 r16; /* Reader count - msb */
> + u8 r8; /* Reader count - lsb */
> + u8 writer; /* Writer state */
> +#endif
> + };
> + atomic_t rwa; /* Reader/writer atomic */
> + u32 rwc; /* Reader/writer counts */
> + } cnts;
> + struct qrwnode *waitq; /* Tail of waiting queue */
> +} arch_rwlock_t;
> +
> +/*
> + * Writer states & reader shift and bias
> + */
> +#define _QW_WAITING 1 /* A writer is waiting */
> +#define _QW_LOCKED 0xff /* A writer holds the lock */
> +#define _QR_SHIFT 8 /* Reader count shift */
> +#define _QR_BIAS (1U << _QR_SHIFT)
> +
> +/*
> + * External function declarations
> + */
> +extern void queue_read_lock_slowpath(struct qrwlock *lock);
> +extern void queue_write_lock_slowpath(struct qrwlock *lock);
> +
> +/**
> + * queue_read_can_lock- would read_trylock() succeed?
> + * @lock: Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + */
> +static inline int queue_read_can_lock(struct qrwlock *lock)
> +{
> + return !ACCESS_ONCE(lock->cnts.writer);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * queue_write_can_lock- would write_trylock() succeed?
> + * @lock: Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + */
> +static inline int queue_write_can_lock(struct qrwlock *lock)
> +{
> + return !ACCESS_ONCE(lock->cnts.rwc);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * queue_read_trylock - try to acquire read lock of a queue rwlock
> + * @lock : Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + * Return: 1 if lock acquired, 0 if failed
> + */
> +static inline int queue_read_trylock(struct qrwlock *lock)
> +{
> + union qrwcnts cnts;
> +
> + cnts.rwc = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->cnts.rwc);
> + if (likely(!cnts.writer)) {
> + cnts.rwc = (u32)atomic_add_return(_QR_BIAS, &lock->cnts.rwa);
> + if (likely(!cnts.writer))
> + return 1;
> + atomic_sub(_QR_BIAS, &lock->cnts.rwa);
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * queue_write_trylock - try to acquire write lock of a queue rwlock
> + * @lock : Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + * Return: 1 if lock acquired, 0 if failed
> + */
> +static inline int queue_write_trylock(struct qrwlock *lock)
> +{
> + union qrwcnts old, new;
> +
> + old.rwc = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->cnts.rwc);
> + if (likely(!old.rwc)) {
> + new.rwc = old.rwc;
> + new.writer = _QW_LOCKED;
> + if (likely(cmpxchg(&lock->cnts.rwc, old.rwc, new.rwc)
> + == old.rwc))
> + return 1;
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
> +/**
> + * queue_read_lock - acquire read lock of a queue rwlock
> + * @lock: Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + */
> +static inline void queue_read_lock(struct qrwlock *lock)
> +{
> + union qrwcnts cnts;
> +
> + cnts.rwc = atomic_add_return(_QR_BIAS, &lock->cnts.rwa);
> + if (likely(!cnts.writer))
> + return;
> + /*
> + * Slowpath will decrement the reader count, if necessary
> + */
> + queue_read_lock_slowpath(lock);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * queue_write_lock - acquire write lock of a queue rwlock
> + * @lock : Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + */
> +static inline void queue_write_lock(struct qrwlock *lock)
> +{
> + /*
> + * Optimize for the unfair lock case where the fair flag is 0.
> + */
> + if (cmpxchg(&lock->cnts.rwc, 0, _QW_LOCKED) == 0)
> + return;
> + queue_write_lock_slowpath(lock);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * queue_read_unlock - release read lock of a queue rwlock
> + * @lock : Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + */
> +static inline void queue_read_unlock(struct qrwlock *lock)
> +{
> + /*
> + * Atomically decrement the reader count
> + */
> + atomic_sub(_QR_BIAS, &lock->cnts.rwa);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * queue_write_unlock - release write lock of a queue rwlock
> + * @lock : Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + */
> +static inline void queue_write_unlock(struct qrwlock *lock)
> +{
> + /*
> + * Make sure that none of the critical section will be leaked out.
> + */
> + smp_mb__before_clear_bit();
> + ACCESS_ONCE(lock->cnts.writer) = 0;
> + smp_mb__after_clear_bit();
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Initializier
> + */
> +#define __ARCH_RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED { .cnts = { .rwc = 0 }, .waitq = NULL }
> +
> +/*
> + * Remapping rwlock architecture specific functions to the corresponding
> + * queue rwlock functions.
> + */
> +#define arch_read_can_lock(l) queue_read_can_lock(l)
> +#define arch_write_can_lock(l) queue_write_can_lock(l)
> +#define arch_read_lock(l) queue_read_lock(l)
> +#define arch_write_lock(l) queue_write_lock(l)
> +#define arch_read_trylock(l) queue_read_trylock(l)
> +#define arch_write_trylock(l) queue_write_trylock(l)
> +#define arch_read_unlock(l) queue_read_unlock(l)
> +#define arch_write_unlock(l) queue_write_unlock(l)
> +
> +#endif /* __ASM_GENERIC_QRWLOCK_H */
> diff --git a/kernel/Kconfig.locks b/kernel/Kconfig.locks
> index d2b32ac..b665478 100644
> --- a/kernel/Kconfig.locks
> +++ b/kernel/Kconfig.locks
> @@ -223,3 +223,10 @@ endif
> config MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER
> def_bool y
> depends on SMP && !DEBUG_MUTEXES
> +
> +config ARCH_QUEUE_RWLOCK
> + bool
> +
> +config QUEUE_RWLOCK
> + def_bool y if ARCH_QUEUE_RWLOCK
> + depends on SMP
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/Makefile b/kernel/locking/Makefile
> index baab8e5..3e7bab1 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/Makefile
> +++ b/kernel/locking/Makefile
> @@ -23,3 +23,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock_debug.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK) += rwsem-spinlock.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_RWSEM_XCHGADD_ALGORITHM) += rwsem-xadd.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PERCPU_RWSEM) += percpu-rwsem.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_QUEUE_RWLOCK) += qrwlock.o
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c b/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..ae45dae
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,282 @@
> +/*
> + * Queue read/write lock
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> + * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> + * (at your option) any later version.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
> + * GNU General Public License for more details.
> + *
> + * (C) Copyright 2013 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.
> + *
> + * Authors: Waiman Long <waiman.long@xxxxxx>
> + */
> +#include <linux/smp.h>
> +#include <linux/bug.h>
> +#include <linux/cpumask.h>
> +#include <linux/percpu.h>
> +#include <linux/hardirq.h>
> +#include <asm-generic/qrwlock.h>
> +
> +/*
> + * Compared with regular rwlock, the queue rwlock has has the following
> + * advantages:
> + * 1. Even though there is a slight chance of stealing the lock if come at
> + * the right moment, the granting of the lock is mostly in FIFO order.
> + * 2. It is usually faster in high contention situation.
> + *
> + * The only downside is that the lock is 4 bytes larger in 32-bit systems
> + * and 12 bytes larger in 64-bit systems.
> + *
> + * There are two queues for writers. The writer field of the lock is a
> + * one-slot wait queue. The writers that follow will have to wait in the
> + * combined reader/writer queue (waitq).
> + *
> + * Compared with x86 ticket spinlock, the queue rwlock is faster in high
> + * contention situation. The writer lock is also faster in single thread
> + * operations. Therefore, queue rwlock can be considered as a replacement
> + * for those spinlocks that are highly contended as long as an increase
> + * in lock size is not an issue.
> + */
> +
> +#ifndef arch_mutex_cpu_relax
> +# define arch_mutex_cpu_relax() cpu_relax()
> +#endif
> +
> +#ifndef smp_load_acquire
> +# ifdef CONFIG_X86
> +# define smp_load_acquire(p) \
> + ({ \
> + typeof(*p) ___p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(*p); \
> + barrier(); \
> + ___p1; \
> + })
> +# else
> +# define smp_load_acquire(p) \
> + ({ \
> + typeof(*p) ___p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(*p); \
> + smp_mb(); \
> + ___p1; \
> + })
> +# endif
> +#endif
> +
> +#ifndef smp_store_release
> +# ifdef CONFIG_X86
> +# define smp_store_release(p, v) \
> + do { \
> + barrier(); \
> + ACCESS_ONCE(*p) = v; \
> + } while (0)
> +# else
> +# define smp_store_release(p, v) \
> + do { \
> + smp_mb(); \
> + ACCESS_ONCE(*p) = v; \
> + } while (0)
> +# endif
> +#endif
> +
> +/*
> + * If an xadd (exchange-add) macro isn't available, simulate one with
> + * the atomic_add_return() function.
> + */
> +#ifdef xadd
> +# define qrw_xadd(rw, inc) xadd(&(rw).rwc, inc)
> +#else
> +# define qrw_xadd(rw, inc) (u32)(atomic_add_return(inc, &(rw).rwa) - inc)
> +#endif
> +
> +/**
> + * wait_in_queue - Add to queue and wait until it is at the head
> + * @lock: Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + * @node: Node pointer to be added to the queue
> + */
> +static inline void wait_in_queue(struct qrwlock *lock, struct qrwnode *node)
> +{
> + struct qrwnode *prev;
> +
> + node->next = NULL;
> + node->wait = true;
> + prev = xchg(&lock->waitq, node);
> + if (prev) {
> + prev->next = node;
> + /*
> + * Wait until the waiting flag is off
> + */
> + while (smp_load_acquire(&node->wait))
> + arch_mutex_cpu_relax();
> + }
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * signal_next - Signal the next one in queue to be at the head
> + * @lock: Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + * @node: Node pointer to the current head of queue
> + */
> +static inline void signal_next(struct qrwlock *lock, struct qrwnode *node)
> +{
> + struct qrwnode *next;
> +
> + /*
> + * Try to notify the next node first without disturbing the cacheline
> + * of the lock. If that fails, check to see if it is the last node
> + * and so should clear the wait queue.
> + */
> + next = ACCESS_ONCE(node->next);
> + if (likely(next))
> + goto notify_next;
> +
> + /*
> + * Clear the wait queue if it is the last node
> + */
> + if ((ACCESS_ONCE(lock->waitq) == node) &&
> + (cmpxchg(&lock->waitq, node, NULL) == node))
> + return;
> + /*
> + * Wait until the next one in queue set up the next field
> + */
> + while (likely(!(next = ACCESS_ONCE(node->next))))
> + arch_mutex_cpu_relax();
> + /*
> + * The next one in queue is now at the head
> + */
> +notify_next:
> + smp_store_release(&next->wait, false);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * rspin_until_writer_unlock - inc reader count & spin until writer is gone
> + * @lock : Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + * @writer: Current queue rwlock writer status byte
> + *
> + * In interrupt context or at the head of the queue, the reader will just
> + * increment the reader count & wait until the writer releases the lock.
> + */
> +static __always_inline void
> +rspin_until_writer_unlock(struct qrwlock *lock, u8 writer)
> +{
> + while (writer == _QW_LOCKED) {
> + arch_mutex_cpu_relax();
> + writer = smp_load_acquire(&lock->cnts.writer);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * queue_read_lock_slowpath - acquire read lock of a queue rwlock
> + * @lock: Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + */
> +void queue_read_lock_slowpath(struct qrwlock *lock)
> +{
> + struct qrwnode node;
> + union qrwcnts cnts;
> +
> + /*
> + * Readers come here when they cannot get the lock without waiting
> + */
> + if (unlikely(irq_count())) {
> + /*
> + * Readers in interrupt context will spin until the lock is
> + * available without waiting in the queue.
> + */
> + cnts.rwc = smp_load_acquire(&lock->cnts.rwc);
> + rspin_until_writer_unlock(lock, cnts.writer);
> + return;
> + }
> + atomic_sub(_QR_BIAS, &lock->cnts.rwa);
> +
> + /*
> + * Put the reader into the wait queue
> + */
> + wait_in_queue(lock, &node);
> +
> + /*
> + * At the head of the wait queue now, wait until the writer state
> + * goes to 0 and then try to increment the reader count and get
> + * the lock. It is possible that an incoming writer may steal the
> + * lock in the interim, so it is necessary to check the writer byte
> + * to make sure that the write lock isn't taken.
> + */
> + while (ACCESS_ONCE(lock->cnts.writer))
> + arch_mutex_cpu_relax();
> + cnts.rwc = qrw_xadd(lock->cnts, _QR_BIAS);
> + rspin_until_writer_unlock(lock, cnts.writer);
> +
> + /*
> + * Signal the next one in queue to become queue head
> + */
> + signal_next(lock, &node);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(queue_read_lock_slowpath);
> +
> +/**
> + * qwrite_trylock - Try to acquire the write lock
> + * @lock : Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + * @old : The current queue rwlock counts
> + * Return: 1 if lock acquired, 0 otherwise
> + */
> +static __always_inline int
> +qwrite_trylock(struct qrwlock *lock, u32 old)
> +{
> + if (likely(cmpxchg(&lock->cnts.rwc, old, _QW_LOCKED) == old))
> + return 1;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * queue_write_3step_lock - acquire write lock in 3 steps
> + * @lock : Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + *
> + * Step 1 - Try to acquire the lock directly if no reader is present
> + * Step 2 - Set the waiting flag to notify readers that a writer is waiting
> + * Step 3 - When the readers field goes to 0, set the locked flag
> + */
> +static inline void queue_write_3step_lock(struct qrwlock *lock)
> +{
> + u32 rwc;
> + u8 writer;
> +
> + /* Step 1 */
> + if (!ACCESS_ONCE(lock->cnts.rwc) && qwrite_trylock(lock, 0))
> + return;
> +
> + /* Step 2 */
> + writer = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->cnts.writer);
> + while (writer || (cmpxchg(&lock->cnts.writer, 0, _QW_WAITING) != 0)) {
> + arch_mutex_cpu_relax();
> + writer = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->cnts.writer);
> + }
> +
> + /* Step 3 */
> + rwc = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->cnts.rwc);
> + while ((rwc > _QW_WAITING) || !qwrite_trylock(lock, _QW_WAITING)) {
> + arch_mutex_cpu_relax();
> + rwc = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->cnts.rwc);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * queue_write_lock_slowpath - acquire write lock of a queue rwlock
> + * @lock : Pointer to queue rwlock structure
> + */
> +void queue_write_lock_slowpath(struct qrwlock *lock)
> +{
> + struct qrwnode node;
> +
> + /*
> + * Put the writer into the wait queue
> + */
> + wait_in_queue(lock, &node);
> +
> + /*
> + * At the head of the wait queue now, call queue_write_3step_lock()
> + * to acquire the lock until it is done.
> + */
> + queue_write_3step_lock(lock);
> + signal_next(lock, &node);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(queue_write_lock_slowpath);
> --
> 1.7.1
>
--
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/