Re: [PATCH v15 09/15] pvqspinlock: Implement simple paravirt support for the qspinlock

[Waiman Long]

On 04/13/2015 10:47 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 05:41:44PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> > > > +void __init __pv_init_lock_hash(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	int pv_hash_size = 4 * num_possible_cpus();
> > > > +
> > > > +	if (pv_hash_size<   (1U<<   LFSR_MIN_BITS))
> > > > +		pv_hash_size = (1U<<   LFSR_MIN_BITS);
> > > > +	/*
> > > > +	 * Allocate space from bootmem which should be page-size aligned
> > > > +	 * and hence cacheline aligned.
> > > > +	 */
> > > > +	pv_lock_hash = alloc_large_system_hash("PV qspinlock",
> > > > +					       sizeof(struct pv_hash_bucket),
> > > > +					       pv_hash_size, 0, HASH_EARLY,
> > > > +					&pv_lock_hash_bits, NULL,
> > > > +					       pv_hash_size, pv_hash_size);
> > > 	pv_taps = lfsr_taps(pv_lock_hash_bits);
> > I don't understand what you meant here.
> Let me explain (even though I propose taking all the LFSR stuff out).
>
> pv_lock_hash_bit is a runtime variable, therefore it cannot compile time
> evaluate the forest of if statements required to compute the taps value.
>
> Therefore its best to compute the taps _once_, and this seems like a
> good place to do so.

OK, I got it. That make sense.

> > > > +				goto done;
> > > > +			}
> > > > +		}
> > > > +
> > > > +		hash = lfsr(hash, pv_lock_hash_bits, 0);
> > > Since pv_lock_hash_bits is a variable, you end up running through that
> > > massive if() forest to find the corresponding tap every single time. It
> > > cannot compile-time optimize it.
> > The minimum bits size is now 8. So unless the system has more than 64 vCPUs,
> > it will get the right value in the first if statement.
> Still, no reason to not pre-compute the taps value, its simple enough.

Still, we need to keep the hash_bits value as it will needed by the 
hashing function.

I have taken out the lfsr code and use linear probing in the updated 
qspinlock patch that I am working on. However, we can always add that 
back in as an additional patch.

Cheers,
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/